Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[Paul Bart]

Hi Denis

I have an OZ Flarm for sale

Cheers

Paul
On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson" 
wrote:

> Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dennis
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[dennis hipperson]

Hi Paul,

How much are you after for it.
Tell me about it.

Dennis

On 23/08/14 7:46 PM, Paul Bart wrote:


Hi Denis

I have an OZ Flarm for sale

Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson" > wrote:


Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.

Regards,

Dennis
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[Paul Bart]

Hi Denis

Not sure what I can say about it, it is a flarm with display, I am going up
to instruct tomorrow, so I can take a picture. It is fully functional and
currently in use.

Not so sure about the price, new unit is $911.75. So I guess $350 may seem
reasonable.

Cheers

Paul
On Aug 23, 2014 8:50 PM, "dennis hipperson" 
wrote:

>  Hi Paul,
>
> How much are you after for it.
> Tell me about it.
>
> Dennis
>
> On 23/08/14 7:46 PM, Paul Bart wrote:
>
> Hi Denis
>
> I have an OZ Flarm for sale
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
> On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson" 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dennis
>> ___
>> Aus-soaring mailing list
>> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
>> To check or change subscription details, visit:
>> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>>
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing listaus-soar...@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, 
> visit:http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[dennis hipperson]

Thanks Paul,

Look forward to the pics.

Cheers,

Dennis

On 23/08/14 8:58 PM, Paul Bart wrote:


Hi Denis

Not sure what I can say about it, it is a flarm with display, I am 
going up to instruct tomorrow, so I can take a picture. It is fully 
functional and currently in use.


Not so sure about the price, new unit is $911.75. So I guess $350 may 
seem reasonable.


Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 8:50 PM, "dennis hipperson" > wrote:


Hi Paul,

How much are you after for it.
Tell me about it.

Dennis

On 23/08/14 7:46 PM, Paul Bart wrote:


Hi Denis

I have an OZ Flarm for sale

Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson"
mailto:dennishipper...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.

Regards,

Dennis
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net  

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[dennis hipperson]

Thanks Paul,

Look forward to the pics.

Cheers,

Dennis

On 23/08/14 8:58 PM, Paul Bart wrote:


Hi Denis

Not sure what I can say about it, it is a flarm with display, I am 
going up to instruct tomorrow, so I can take a picture. It is fully 
functional and currently in use.


Not so sure about the price, new unit is $911.75. So I guess $350 may 
seem reasonable.


Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 8:50 PM, "dennis hipperson" > wrote:


Hi Paul,

How much are you after for it.
Tell me about it.

Dennis

On 23/08/14 7:46 PM, Paul Bart wrote:


Hi Denis

I have an OZ Flarm for sale

Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson"
mailto:dennishipper...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.

Regards,

Dennis
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net  

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[dennis hipperson]

Paul,

Does it have SD card and flight recorder?

Dennis


On 23/08/14 8:58 PM, Paul Bart wrote:


Hi Denis

Not sure what I can say about it, it is a flarm with display, I am 
going up to instruct tomorrow, so I can take a picture. It is fully 
functional and currently in use.


Not so sure about the price, new unit is $911.75. So I guess $350 may 
seem reasonable.


Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 8:50 PM, "dennis hipperson" > wrote:


Hi Paul,

How much are you after for it.
Tell me about it.

Dennis

On 23/08/14 7:46 PM, Paul Bart wrote:


Hi Denis

I have an OZ Flarm for sale

Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson"
mailto:dennishipper...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.

Regards,

Dennis
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net  

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net

To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[Gary Stevenson]

Hi Guys,

There is no doubt that the Aus-soaring site is an appropriate and  great place 
to buy and sell gliding related items for forum members. 

 

HOWEVER once you have made initial contact, PLEASE conduct the rest of your 
negotiations offline.

 

I suggest that the initial postee, might put a brief  note on the site as to 
the outcome of his/her post, if the outcome is positive.

 

Gary

PS I have an ASW 20BL supership for sale.  I need to reduce my fleet holding. 
Contact me off line, or give me a call me on 03 5352 4938 if this is the ship 
you need. 

 

From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net 
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Paul Bart
Sent: Saturday, 23 August 2014 7:47 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

 

Hi Denis

I have an OZ Flarm for sale

Cheers

Paul

On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson"  wrote:

Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.

Regards,

Dennis
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm

[Paul Bart]

Yes you are correct Gary, I did not think about it. Our (DDSC) list replies
to sender only. So the mistake is entirely mine.

Cheers

Paypul
On Aug 23, 2014 10:25 PM, "Gary Stevenson"  wrote:

>  Hi Guys,
>
> There is no doubt that the Aus-soaring site is an appropriate and  great
> place to buy and sell gliding related items for forum members.
>
>
>
> HOWEVER once you have made initial contact, *PLEASE *conduct the rest of
> your negotiations offline.
>
>
>
> I suggest that the initial postee, might put a brief  note on the site as
> to the outcome of his/her post, if the outcome is positive.
>
>
>
> Gary
>
> PS I have an ASW 20BL supership for sale.  I need to reduce my fleet
> holding. Contact me off line, or give me a call me on 03 5352 4938 if this
> is the ship you need.
>
>
>
> *From:* aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:
> aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] *On Behalf Of *Paul Bart
> *Sent:* Saturday, 23 August 2014 7:47 PM
> *To:* Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
> *Subject:* Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm
>
>
>
> Hi Denis
>
> I have an OZ Flarm for sale
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
>
> On Aug 23, 2014 6:11 PM, "dennis hipperson" 
> wrote:
>
> Hi all am looking for a second hand flarm any for sale.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dennis
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[RF Developments Pty Ltd]

Robert,

Australia is going ADS-B which will give the same protection, all you need
is a 1090 receiver and PDA, or possibly by then you might be able to use the
existing moving map glide computers like the B2000 etc, they will receive
the LAT/LON and height, plus aircraft ID so it would be easy to display
these. The glider will still require the ADS-B squitter box, which is
currently being developed, I have just got back from Germany with such a
unit which we will make here in Oz, as well as other products from Filser (
radios and transponders ) under a new company here - Filser
International/Avionics Australasia.

There are a number of the other systems around ( like that in the U.K ),
unfortunately all using non standard design and non certified ( we have VH
registered aircraft ), and rely on everyone buying that brand. ADS-B will be
a universal system allowing all to use the same technology, as well as
providing ATC coverage which should ultimately free up airspace.

Cheers

Nigel



  

Nigel Andrews

Managing Director

RF Developments Pty Ltd

"A Queensland Company devoted to Research and Development in aviation
electronics" 

Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Web www.rf-developments.com

Ph: (61) 7 54635670 Fax: (61) 7 54635695

**DISCLAIMER

The information contained in the above e-mail message or messages (which
includes any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. It
is intended only for the use of the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you are not the addressee any form of disclosure, copying,
modification, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on the
information is unauthorised. If you received this communication in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your computer system
network. 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Hart
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 9:33 AM
To: Soaring in Australia
Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


Hi

I was just looking over the BGA pages and came across a mention of FLARM 
(see http://www.flarm.com/index_en.html)

Flarm warns against aircrafts and obstacles.

The small-size, low-cost, low-power device FLARM broadcasts its own
position and speed vector (as obtained with an integrated GPS) over
a license-free ISM band radio transmission. At the same time it
listens to other devices based on the same standard. Intelligent
motion prediction algorithms predict short-term conflicts and warn
the pilot accordingly by acoustical and visual means. FLARM
incorporates a high-precision WAAS 16-channel GPS receiver and an
integrated low-power radio transceiver. Static obstacles are
included in FLARM's database. The collision warning algorithms were
calibrated and optimized using thousands of flight logs. No warning
is given if an aircraft does not pose an immediate threat.

Is this compatible/comparable with the system here in Australia (whose 
name currently escapes me)?

I also wonder when exactly a glider in the same thermal as you is deemed 
to 'pose an immediate threat'?

-- 
Robert Hart  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+61 (0)438 385 533
Brisbane, Australiahttp://www.hart.wattle.id.au

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[gjo]

> Australia is going ADS-B which will give the same protection, all you need
> is a 1090 receiver and PDA, or possibly by then you might be able to use the
> existing moving map glide computers like the B2000 etc, they will receive
> the LAT/LON and height, plus aircraft ID so it would be easy to display
> these. The glider will still require the ADS-B squitter box, which is
> currently being developed
> 

What are the power consumption characteristics of all this ADS-B gear?
The FLARM is supposed to be 52mA.
What about cost? The FLARM seems to cost about the same as an IGC logger.


Does a ADS-B system give more than just a proximity alert?
FLARM is supposed to be smart, designed for use in gliding so it isn't
supposed to give alerts for close aircraft that are on non-threatening
trajectories.

This type technology isn't of much use unless it is universally adopted.
If the FLARM technology works as advertised, making it
compulsory for gliding competitions could speed it's introduction.



Greg O'Sullivan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mike Borgelt]

At 09:32 AM 24/05/05 +1000, you wrote:
>Hi
>
>I was just looking over the BGA pages and came across a mention of FLARM 
>(see http://www.flarm.com/index_en.html)
>
>Flarm warns against aircrafts and obstacles.
>
>The small-size, low-cost, low-power device FLARM broadcasts its own
>position and speed vector (as obtained with an integrated GPS) over
>a license-free ISM band radio transmission. At the same time it
>listens to other devices based on the same standard. Intelligent
>motion prediction algorithms predict short-term conflicts and warn
>the pilot accordingly by acoustical and visual means. FLARM
>incorporates a high-precision WAAS 16-channel GPS receiver and an
>integrated low-power radio transceiver. Static obstacles are
>included in FLARM's database. The collision warning algorithms were
>calibrated and optimized using thousands of flight logs. No warning
>is given if an aircraft does not pose an immediate threat.
>
>Is this compatible/comparable with the system here in Australia (whose 
>name currently escapes me)?
>
>I also wonder when exactly a glider in the same thermal as you is deemed 
>to 'pose an immediate threat'?
>
>-- 
>Robert Hart  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>+61 (0)438 385 533
>Brisbane, Australiahttp://www.hart.wattle.id.au


Interestingly the IGC has banned the use of FLARM in contests as it
breaches a rule that says you can't transmit data from one glider to another.

ADSB would seem to have the same problem so a little re thinking by the IGC
would seem to be in order so that glider pilots could benefit from
collision protection. Glider pilots probably stand to benefit most from
this as enroute collisions between powered aircraft at Australian traffic
densities are extremely unlikely. Gliders tend to concentrate in the same air.

FLARM was developed by the Swiss for use in the mountains where there are
likely to be lots of head on conflict cases developing. Don't know how it
helps when you go around a corner of the mountain and suddenly get line of
sight on a rapidly closing glider. The signals won't go through the hill.
It will help avoiding things like power lines and transport cables which
can be a significant hazard in the mountains in Europe. As ADSB gives you a
GPS receiver it should be able to do the same thing.

As for costs, last I heard ADSB fit was quoted at something like A$7000 per
aircraft just for the GPS/1090 transmitter. Allegedly Airservices are going
to subsidise this. If you believe that I've got a nice bridge for you.

Mike


Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Stuart & Kerri FERGUSON]

Sounds like it will be information overload in a busy thermal 
unless there are some serious filters. 

All the electronic aids we can carry require interpretation - 
nothing will replace "Eyeball Mk 1" as the primary source, and 
audio as our secondary, the rest are nice to haves.  

"Lookout" 

SDF
  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 24 May 2005 11:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring
in Australia.
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM 


> Australia is going ADS-B which will give the same protection, all you need
> is a 1090 receiver and PDA, or possibly by then you might be able to use
the
> existing moving map glide computers like the B2000 etc, they will receive
> the LAT/LON and height, plus aircraft ID so it would be easy to display
> these. The glider will still require the ADS-B squitter box, which is
> currently being developed
> 

What are the power consumption characteristics of all this ADS-B gear?
The FLARM is supposed to be 52mA.
What about cost? The FLARM seems to cost about the same as an IGC logger.


Does a ADS-B system give more than just a proximity alert?
FLARM is supposed to be smart, designed for use in gliding so it isn't
supposed to give alerts for close aircraft that are on non-threatening
trajectories.

This type technology isn't of much use unless it is universally adopted.
If the FLARM technology works as advertised, making it
compulsory for gliding competitions could speed it's introduction.



Greg O'Sullivan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Don Ingram]

As an outsiders quick & admittedly largely uninformed view...  But an 
opinion from the chattering masses none the less and readily intended to 
be torn to shreds ;-)


The primary difference between ADSB & FLARM with respect to sports 
aviation seems to be the potentially massive difference in cost unless 
the Govt subsidises ADSB to get it in use. The system is as it is being 
applied intended for everything from a hang glider to a 747 in order to 
maintain standardisation at all cost. Regardless, that is, of the actual 
requirements of the different levels of operation within aviation as a 
whole, or their capacity to carry & operate the equipment.


If ADSB is not used by EVERYTHING then there are still enormous 
opportunities for failure. It will provide coverage for mainstream GA 
operating in controlled areas but it will fail when operating in areas 
where there are aircraft operating without the equipment in 
non-controlled areas. Some of the system configurations suggested only 
solve half of the problem i.e. reporting position but not being able to 
view others or alternatively detecting others but not reporting position.


Having said this it remains that ADSB will be:
- Analysed & specified to the finest detail
- Tested & tested &...
- Manufactured by companies competent in the Avionics field
- Certified as compliant with the above

The FLARM style of system has great potential for a 2nd layer of 
operation but it must be recognised up front that it will meet very few 
of the above.


It may however provide an excellent resource for light aircraft with 
limited battery capacity. The biggest failing in the FLARM system at 
present is it's use of the ISM band. Admittedly if the units functioned 
simultaneously on two of the SS bands it may boost the probability of 
reliable operation but the risk remains large.


FLARM on a dedicated chunk of spectrum would be an entirely different 
matter. Enter FLARM_ver2 for want of a better description.


A system using a dedicated broadband RF slot, DGPS or other secondary 
system capable of indicating satellite status, optional 2nd GPS, BSP ( 
brutally simple protocol ) is not outside the bounds of reality. 
Particularly when an Open Source development model is applied to the 
project as lots of sets of eyes, many very competant engineers, get to 
do code walk throughs. The goal would be a simple, robust, cost 
effective system, with a far better suitability to purpose.


Such a project is well within the capabilities of the gliding movement 
as an international body, particularly when carried out in conjunction 
with some of the major Universities already working in the area, FLARM 
being the example. Toss in some Government grants to improve air safety 
while allowing the Government to get out of supplying subsidies for the 
far more expensive ADSB. Where do we sign...


The system could operate at two levels-

- Level 1: High bit rate, short range, low power, low current, 
anti-collision based on single chip freq hopping spread spectrum 
devices. Capable of maintaining a rapid update adhoc network with >100 
aircraft in close proximity. May have to be country specific due to 
available bandwidth but the actual transceiver/antenna/band could still 
be same/similar.


- Level 2: Low bit rate, low frequency system, higher power, higher 
current. Lower update rate intended to communicate with ATC ground 
stations ( say on the existing NAV/COM band somewhere ) to exchange 
information for interface to the ADSB system. Exchange is done on a 
regular basis from the sailplane, synched by the ground station, with 
the ground station only broadcasting ADSB traffic as required by the 
light aircraft clients.


The glider pilot gets a reasonably priced system ( the implication being 
that if it is reasonably priced then everything that leaves the ground 
will have one ). ATC gets to know where we are & we get to know where 
the other guys are. Light aviation avionics manufacturers such as Robert 
(if he chooses) manufacture systems & contribute a per unit fee to 
assist with the running of the standards organisation to further develop 
the units.


Because the system is designed for light aviation and it's accompanying 
quirks then it would be possible to block coverage of other sailplanes, 
in a competition for example, if they are outside a preset radius or 
collision model.


FLARM or it's descendants would be difficult to certify as a result of 
their origin but the question to be put is this: Is a certified but only 
partially implemented ADSB any better, or in fact even far worse, than a 
non-certified but FULLY implemented FLARM_ver2 variant.


Cheers

Don

Shred away...



RF Developments Pty Ltd wrote:

Robert,

Australia is going ADS-B which will give the same protection, all you need
is a 1090 receiver and PDA, or possibly by then you might be able to use the
existing moving map glide computers like the B2000 etc, they will receive
the LAT/LON and height,

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[John Giddy]

On Tue, 24 May 2005 12:10:16 +1000, you wrote:

> At 09:32 AM 24/05/05 +1000, you wrote:
>>Hi
>>
>>I was just looking over the BGA pages and came across a mention of FLARM 
>>(see http://www.flarm.com/index_en.html)
>>
>>Flarm warns against aircrafts and obstacles.
>>
>>The small-size, low-cost, low-power device FLARM broadcasts its own
>>position and speed vector (as obtained with an integrated GPS) over
>>a license-free ISM band radio transmission. At the same time it
>>listens to other devices based on the same standard. Intelligent
>>motion prediction algorithms predict short-term conflicts and warn
>>the pilot accordingly by acoustical and visual means. FLARM
>>incorporates a high-precision WAAS 16-channel GPS receiver and an
>>integrated low-power radio transceiver. Static obstacles are
>>included in FLARM's database. The collision warning algorithms were
>>calibrated and optimized using thousands of flight logs. No warning
>>is given if an aircraft does not pose an immediate threat.
>>
>>Is this compatible/comparable with the system here in Australia (whose 
>>name currently escapes me)?
>>
>>I also wonder when exactly a glider in the same thermal as you is deemed 
>>to 'pose an immediate threat'?
>>
>>-- 
>>Robert Hart  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>+61 (0)438 385 533
>>Brisbane, Australiahttp://www.hart.wattle.id.au
> 
> 
> Interestingly the IGC has banned the use of FLARM in contests as it
> breaches a rule that says you can't transmit data from one glider to another.
> 
> ADSB would seem to have the same problem so a little re thinking by the IGC
> would seem to be in order so that glider pilots could benefit from
> collision protection. Glider pilots probably stand to benefit most from
> this as enroute collisions between powered aircraft at Australian traffic
> densities are extremely unlikely. Gliders tend to concentrate in the same air.
> 
> FLARM was developed by the Swiss for use in the mountains where there are
> likely to be lots of head on conflict cases developing. Don't know how it
> helps when you go around a corner of the mountain and suddenly get line of
> sight on a rapidly closing glider. The signals won't go through the hill.
> It will help avoiding things like power lines and transport cables which
> can be a significant hazard in the mountains in Europe. As ADSB gives you a
> GPS receiver it should be able to do the same thing.
> 
> As for costs, last I heard ADSB fit was quoted at something like A$7000 per
> aircraft just for the GPS/1090 transmitter. Allegedly Airservices are going
> to subsidise this. If you believe that I've got a nice bridge for you.
> 
> Mike

One of the main reasons that Air Services is interested in ADS-B is
that if adopted Australia-wide, it will overcome the need to install a
new set of very expensive secodary radar sets. (the present set is
almost at the end of their life)  ADS-B receivers on the ground are
relatively cheap, thus allowing a wider coverage at much lower cost.
The intention is that the cost saved is used to subsidise the aircraft
installations.  There is an incentive for Air Services to assist
aircraft installations, as it gives much better coverage for ATC, and
has the benefit (if the aircraft owner wants it) to provide direct
collision avoidance between aircraft. AFAIK, it will only be mandatory
to install the transmit half of the system. The receiver in an
aircraft will be optional.
FLARM is a good idea, but if not adopted by *all* aircraft, is only
partially useful.
John G.
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Peter Creswick]

I am  not ATC, but I think the show stopper problem IS certification.
Consider for example, what happens if an RPT twin goes into Narromine, 
or Gawler say ?  Even if FLAMS or anything else could exchange data with 
an ATC ground station for feeding into TAAATS, and thence back out to 
the twin as an ADSB update, the simple fact is (as I see it) that 
LEGALLY, ASA could not take the risk that it might be corrupt data.  
They have to maintain both system and data integrity.  That is what 
certification is all about in the first place.  You can't walk away from 
the certification issue if you want anything to do with ATC, either 
feeding them data, or getting their data.  Further, once ICAO mandates 
ADSB, I can't see any other system being LEGALLY acceptable for 
integration with ATC.
Whatever other systems may be used by gliders amongst themselves outside 
controlled airspace is "probably" open to choice, legally, but I think 
the ATC world could only consider any such position reporting (if they 
even take a feed at all) simply as supplementary data, no more valid 
than a good old style radio position report, WITH, the VFR navigation 
margins applied, ie, 2 miles below 5,000 etc, so you can forget about 
any supposed GPS based precision reporting, even in 2 dimensions, let 
alone 3D, DGPS notwithstanding.  That would mean ATC could still advise 
the IFR twin of the glider(s) simply as alerted VFR traffic, nothing 
more.  Moreover, gliders, being uncontrolled VFR, would not be advised 
of the twin.  In short, there would be no efective change from what 
exists today, so far as ATC is concerned, so far as I can see.


--
Peter Creswick
E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Land Line  02 9718 4841
Mobile/SMS 0401 758 025

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mike Borgelt]

At 12:05 PM 24/05/05 +1000, you wrote:
>As an outsiders quick & admittedly largely uninformed view...  But an 
>opinion from the chattering masses none the less and readily intended to 
>be torn to shreds ;-)
>
>The primary difference between ADSB & FLARM with respect to sports 
>aviation seems to be the potentially massive difference in cost unless 
>the Govt subsidises ADSB to get it in use. The system is as it is being 
>applied intended for everything from a hang glider to a 747 in order to 
>maintain standardisation at all cost. Regardless, that is, of the actual 
>requirements of the different levels of operation within aviation as a 
>whole, or their capacity to carry & operate the equipment.

Don,

I wouldn't get too excited about the gliding movement being able to
organise anything let alone a technology development program.

I gather the main feature of FLARM is that it _actually works_ and is in a
lot of gliders and being tested and gaining operational experience every day.

Is the use of an unlicensed band such a risk? 

If an ADSB GPS/transmitter outputs GPS data for use by FLARM then the FLARM
might still be the way to go on its unlicensed band as the software is
optimised to prevent glider to glider collisions. Alternatively the FLARM
rf section might be the ADSB section for both transmitter and receiver and
FLARM software could be used in your receiver warning device.

ADSB isn't going to be cheap at all. They are insisting on a TSO'd GPS card
and the whole thing will have to be TSO'd. Read expensive.
A fancy GPS receiver is necessary if you want absolute positions for ATC
purposes. For aircraft to aircraft collision avoidance only relative
positions are necessary. It doesn't matter that the absolute positions are
out by some amount. Well mounted antennas feeding the same model GPS
receivers running the same software and with the same setups are all that
is required.

ADSB also transmits the data twice a second. So how far can a bugsmasher or
glider go in 0.5 seconds?

ADSB will need the transmitter power to get back to the ADSB receiver on
the ground. FLARM or any aircraft to aircraft anti collision device only
needs to reach as far as you want warning time for - around 5-10nm will do
fine. This also means the target discrimination processing is a lot
easier.(In Australia, for light aircraft discriminating 1 out of 1 targets
should be easy - for the 1% of the time there is anyone near).

We're now talking a much higher duty cycle on the ADSB transmitter than on
a transponder at frequencies that are of concern for health effects. No
problem in a metal aircraft.

We live in interesting times. The fine detail of ADSB implementation will
indeed be fascinating.(code for GA and sport aviation gets screwed - again)

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Robert Hart]

Mike Borgelt wrote:


We live in interesting times. The fine detail of ADSB implementation will
indeed be fascinating.(code for GA and sport aviation gets screwed - again.

Wow - lots of very interesting stuff in just a day - this list is really 
amazing in terms of the expertise that it has available!


I rather hope that GA & sport aviation won't be screwed -by the ADSB 
implementation. Given the ADSB realities as people see them now, what 
position should gliding be taking, what should we be arguing and with 
what data to back us up?


--
Robert Hart  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+61 (0)438 385 533
Brisbane, Australiahttp://www.hart.wattle.id.au

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Peter and Mandy Temple]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Borgelt
> 
> Interestingly the IGC has banned the use of FLARM in contests as it
> breaches a rule that says you can't transmit data from one glider to
> another.

Even more interesting, I have had to hire a FLARM for the French Nationals
and Club Class pre-worlds at Vinon in July this year. They are compulsory
for this competition. Am I wasting my money?

Pete


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Don Ingram]

I rather hope that GA & sport aviation won't be screwed -by the ADSB 
implementation. Given the ADSB realities as people see them now, what 
position should gliding be taking, what should we be arguing and with 
what data to back us up?




A brief, but concise opinion... Worse than a camel.  Not even a 
thoroughbred beaten into submission by a committee, just a lot of bits 
cobbled onto some really dated but common technology.  But who are we to 
argue with government ;-)


Cheers

Don
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Terry Cubley]

As IGC rep I have seen no mention that IGC have banned the use of FLARM. In
actual fact there was a presentation to the IGC by the manufacturers of
FLARM and it received a lot of support from the meeting.

The rules do make restrictions on transmitting info but with the advent of
GPS loggers this has been loosened greatly.

I understand that FLARM is increasing very quicky, in particular in middle
Europe. Good to see that the Vinon comps will support it.

The issue is that all gliders need to have it, the system responds to other
units. You still need to keep a look out because not everyone has one (and
you would want to any way) but as the utilisation increases it becomes more
useful.

Issues in Australia always come back to the transmission medium - radio or
phone transmission all have legislative barriers.

Regards
Terry


- Original Message -
From: "Peter and Mandy Temple" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'"

Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 4:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:aus-soaring-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Borgelt
> >
> > Interestingly the IGC has banned the use of FLARM in contests as it
> > breaches a rule that says you can't transmit data from one glider to
> > another.
>
> Even more interesting, I have had to hire a FLARM for the French Nationals
> and Club Class pre-worlds at Vinon in July this year. They are compulsory
> for this competition. Am I wasting my money?
>
> Pete
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
>
> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005
>
>

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mike Borgelt]

At 10:05 PM 26/05/05 -0700, you wrote:
>As IGC rep I have seen no mention that IGC have banned the use of FLARM. In
>actual fact there was a presentation to the IGC by the manufacturers of
>FLARM and it received a lot of support from the meeting.
>
>The rules do make restrictions on transmitting info but with the advent of
>GPS loggers this has been loosened greatly.


The article I saw mentioned that the rule about restrictions on
transmitting data was the reason that you couldn't currently use FLARM in
IGC contests. Obviously such a rule will simply have to be changed.

Obviously though FLARM would allow some cooperation at a distance between
two pilots without talking on the radio.



>I understand that FLARM is increasing very quicky, in particular in middle
>Europe. Good to see that the Vinon comps will support it.
>
>The issue is that all gliders need to have it, the system responds to other
>units. You still need to keep a look out because not everyone has one (and
>you would want to any way) but as the utilisation increases it becomes more
>useful.

Any piece of electronics can fail at any time also. So how many units do
you need? If a contest requires FLARM what do you do if yours fails on day
2? In Europe there might be a floating pool of units for hire at contests.
In Australia?

>
>Issues in Australia always come back to the transmission medium - radio or
>phone transmission all have legislative barriers.

So do they in Europe, only more so. There is the unlicensed band at 2.4Ghz
which I believe FLARM uses. 

Given the majority of mid airs in Oz aviation occur between gliders or
between gliders and tugs, FLARM in gliders and tugs, particularly at busy
centers, could have a large safety benefit.

Mike

Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mark Newton]

Mike Borgelt wrote:


So do they in Europe, only more so. There is the unlicensed band at 2.4Ghz
which I believe FLARM uses. 


The 2.4GHz band isn't unlicensed, it's class-licensed.

The class license describes it as being suitable for sub-100mW
spread-spectrum transmissions.  There's an EIRP limit as well (so
you can't couple your 100mW transmitter to a high-gain antenna and
blast birds out of the sky at 100 paces :-)

Whatever spread spectrum systems use the license ought to be capable
of coexisting without interfering with each other.  So I should still
be able to use my 802.11g wireless network interface while someone in
the next room is talking on their 2.4GHz digital cordless phone, and
while someone else with a FLARM unit is doing a beat-up over the car
park out the back of my house.

I can't remember if the class license includes limitations on whether
the transmitter needs to be terrestrial.  If it doesn't I suppose it
could be airborne, but it'd have to meet all the other license conditions
as well to pass muster.

I can't be arsed looking it up, but there's a copy of the license on
the ACA's website if anyone is interested.

  - mark


I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[RF Developments Pty Ltd]

Terry,

Maybe GFA should get behind this as another safety initiative?, or at least
talk it over and get some feedback and come up with a plan that would give
us a system that can be made here without relying on foreign companies for
support. Is there a universal protocol being used?

Cost is another issue, what is the current cost of a unit with GPS?

Any liability attached to this, do the contest organisers have to include
yet another clause stating that they accept no responsibility for its use?
Just throwing that in as someone else will eventually, seeing as it is the
world we live in.

Nigel


  

Nigel Andrews

Managing Director

RF Developments Pty Ltd

"A Queensland Company devoted to Research and Development in aviation
electronics" 

Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Web www.rf-developments.com

Ph: (61) 7 54635670 Fax: (61) 7 54635695

**DISCLAIMER

The information contained in the above e-mail message or messages (which
includes any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. It
is intended only for the use of the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you are not the addressee any form of disclosure, copying,
modification, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on the
information is unauthorised. If you received this communication in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your computer system
network. 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry
Cubley
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 3:05 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


As IGC rep I have seen no mention that IGC have banned the use of FLARM. In
actual fact there was a presentation to the IGC by the manufacturers of
FLARM and it received a lot of support from the meeting.

The rules do make restrictions on transmitting info but with the advent of
GPS loggers this has been loosened greatly.

I understand that FLARM is increasing very quicky, in particular in middle
Europe. Good to see that the Vinon comps will support it.

The issue is that all gliders need to have it, the system responds to other
units. You still need to keep a look out because not everyone has one (and
you would want to any way) but as the utilisation increases it becomes more
useful.

Issues in Australia always come back to the transmission medium - radio or
phone transmission all have legislative barriers.

Regards
Terry


- Original Message -
From: "Peter and Mandy Temple" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'"

Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 4:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [mailto:aus-soaring- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> > Mike Borgelt
> >
> > Interestingly the IGC has banned the use of FLARM in contests as it 
> > breaches a rule that says you can't transmit data from one glider to 
> > another.
>
> Even more interesting, I have had to hire a FLARM for the French 
> Nationals and Club Class pre-worlds at Vinon in July this year. They 
> are compulsory for this competition. Am I wasting my money?
>
> Pete
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit: 
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
>
> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005
>
>

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mark Newton]

On 05/07/2005, at 9:50 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Most of the issues, and other signal generators, that you have  
raised also apply in Europe (I would think) and the system still  
appears to work well and the pilots who have got 'em seem to love  
'em and they say that they get reliable warnings without spurious  
alarms.



How do they know the warnings are reliable?

  - mark



I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Geoff Kidd]

Mark

I can only go on what the Europeans have said  but it looks like they 
get a warning on the Flarm and actually find another Glider where the Flarm 
indicates it would be. That's a pretty good test I reckon.


It looks like some were already aware of the other ship in their vicinity 
but others got the warning before they saw the other Glider.


Sounds good doesn't it ... and they report 5 - 18 seconds of warning. 
Wouldn't that be invaluable in a head-on situation?


Geoff



- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM




On 05/07/2005, at 9:50 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Most of the issues, and other signal generators, that you have  raised 
also apply in Europe (I would think) and the system still  appears to 
work well and the pilots who have got 'em seem to love  'em and they say 
that they get reliable warnings without spurious  alarms.



How do they know the warnings are reliable?

  - mark



I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring 


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mark Newton]

On 05/07/2005, at 10:35 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Mark

I can only go on what the Europeans have said  but it looks  
like they get a warning on the Flarm and actually find another  
Glider where the Flarm indicates it would be. That's a pretty good  
test I reckon.



What happens when they don't get a warning on the FLARM even though  
there

is another FLARM-equipped glider very close by which they haven't seen?

(which is what Don Ingram was getting at wrt the reliability of the
communications channel)

You can beacon your position and height as often as you want and it
won't make a lick of difference to your survival rate if the  
communications

channel you're transmitting on is compromised, and nobody else can hear
you.

You said the Europeans say they get a reliable indication.  I put it
to you that it's absolutely impossible to determine whether the
indication is reliable without being able to quantify the false  
negatives.

And false negatives are precisely the class of FLARM failure which will
totally fail to be revealed in anecdotal evidence.

  - mark


I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Geoff Kidd]

Mark

Double negatives aside  how do you rate the double positive of a 
warning that DOES occur when you have no idea that the other ship is aiming 
for you HEAD-ON.


No technology is going to be perfect and not all ships will ever be fitted 
with a suitable unit ... but how many good warnings does a pilot need to 
justify spending $500 - $1000 on a safety issue.


I'll take that double positive any day ... and if there were others in OZ 
with the unit fitted, I'd spend the money tomorrow.


If there are going to be a few Flarm equipped European ships in the 
Temora/Corowa/ Tocumwal/Narromine area this summer, I'd even put one in.


Geoff


- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia." 


Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM




On 05/07/2005, at 10:35 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Mark

I can only go on what the Europeans have said  but it looks  like 
they get a warning on the Flarm and actually find another  Glider where 
the Flarm indicates it would be. That's a pretty good  test I reckon.



What happens when they don't get a warning on the FLARM even though  there
is another FLARM-equipped glider very close by which they haven't seen?

(which is what Don Ingram was getting at wrt the reliability of the
communications channel)

You can beacon your position and height as often as you want and it
won't make a lick of difference to your survival rate if the 
communications

channel you're transmitting on is compromised, and nobody else can hear
you.

You said the Europeans say they get a reliable indication.  I put it
to you that it's absolutely impossible to determine whether the
indication is reliable without being able to quantify the false 
negatives.

And false negatives are precisely the class of FLARM failure which will
totally fail to be revealed in anecdotal evidence.

  - mark


I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring 


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mike Borgelt]

At 10:44 AM 5/07/05 +0930, you wrote:
>And false negatives are precisely the class of FLARM failure which will
>totally fail to be revealed in anecdotal evidence.
>
>   - mark

Presumably if you fly with a few friends and all are FLARM equipped and you
stop getting warnings when from past experience you should have them from
visual observation you will detect the false negatives.

FLARM is electronically  _aided_  VFR, see and avoid, not an IFR system.
Nobody is making claims for prevention of 100% of mid airs or close
encounters, just improvement on the human eye/brain detection/perception
system. The collision detection algorithms were developed by using lots of
real flight logs and I'm sure they have been tweaked since.

User experience seems to be positive. People are getting warnings on
traffic they otherwise wouldn't see. Please everyone read the pdf's on the
FLARM site and the forum.
Let's see what Peter Temple has to say about Vinon. 

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mark Newton]

On 05/07/2005, at 11:03 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Double negatives aside  how do you rate the double  
positive of a warning that DOES occur when you have no idea that  
the other ship is aiming for you HEAD-ON.




Sigh.

There are four possible modes that a system like this can be working in.

 * True Negative (Unit is silent, no threats nearby)
   This is where the typical FLARM installation will spend almost
   all of its life;  the proverbial NULL state.  As long as you have
   some way of testing whether it's still working, this is where you
   WANT it to spend its entire life.

 * True Positive (Unit is alerting, threat is actually nearby)
   This is where the FLARM is correctly alerting you to a potential
   midair.

 * False positive (Unit is alerting, no threats are actually nearby).
   If FLARM units do this more than a handful of times, they will
   produce an extremely powerful psychological reaction in the pilot,
   who will say, "The unit is dodgy, it doesn't work, I'm turning it
   off."  At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to
   everybody.

 * False negative (Unit silent, actual threat nearby)
   This is at least as dangerous as having no FLARM unit at all,
   possibly more so if the pilot has formed the idea that he can
   compromise his lookout if the FLARM is going to tell him about
   midairs anyway.

For a FLARM to be 100% reliable, there would need to be 0 incidences
of the last two categories.

Currently we can probably guess that the false positive category
is pretty low, because anecdotal evidence about the usefulness of
FLARM seems positive, and if the people telling the anecdotes had
been pissed off by errors and turned it off they wouldn't be raving
about its virtues.

But we presently have no data whatsoever about the false negative
category.

Would FLARM be worth installing if the possibility of a false negative
was greater than the possibility of a true positive?  I'd think not.

Mike B reckons the ATSB is comfortable with ADS-B having a 25% false
negative rate (because it's only expected to prevent 75% of midairs).
Do we have any data whatsoever on whether FLARM's false negative
rate exceeds that of ADS-B ?

We need that data to evaluate it.  The data isn't just one of those
things that's nice to have, it's absolutely essential to determine
whether FLARM is an inferior offering to what CASA has in mind for
us.

  - mark


I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Don Ingram]

Geoff Kidd wrote:

Mark

Double negatives aside  how do you rate the double positive 
of a warning that DOES occur when you have no idea that the other ship 
is aiming for you HEAD-ON.


No technology is going to be perfect and not all ships will ever be 
fitted with a suitable unit ... but how many good warnings does a pilot 
need to justify spending $500 - $1000 on a safety issue.


I'll take that double positive any day ... and if there were others in 
OZ with the unit fitted, I'd spend the money tomorrow.


Providing a visual failure & a system failure don't happen on the same 
instance then there is absolutely no argument that it is a grand well spent.


However if it is a provably robust system which is still well priced 
then why wouldn't you mandate it's use? There will still be failures but 
the probability of them occurring will be substantially less. AT least 
then you have given this aspect of Air Safety your best shot.



Don
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Geoff Kidd]

Mike,

   I have sent an email to REGA (Swiss Rescue) and also to Flarm asking 
them both for more info.


   Maybe that will help.

Geoff



- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring inAustralia." 


Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM



At 10:44 AM 5/07/05 +0930, you wrote:

And false negatives are precisely the class of FLARM failure which will
totally fail to be revealed in anecdotal evidence.

  - mark


Presumably if you fly with a few friends and all are FLARM equipped and 
you

stop getting warnings when from past experience you should have them from
visual observation you will detect the false negatives.

FLARM is electronically  _aided_  VFR, see and avoid, not an IFR system.
Nobody is making claims for prevention of 100% of mid airs or close
encounters, just improvement on the human eye/brain detection/perception
system. The collision detection algorithms were developed by using lots of
real flight logs and I'm sure they have been tweaked since.

User experience seems to be positive. People are getting warnings on
traffic they otherwise wouldn't see. Please everyone read the pdf's on the
FLARM site and the forum.
Let's see what Peter Temple has to say about Vinon.

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
 Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring 


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Geoff Kidd]

Mark,

Thanks for your Sigh  and I reciprocate.

Geoff


- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Newton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."

Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM




On 05/07/2005, at 11:03 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Double negatives aside  how do you rate the double  positive
of a warning that DOES occur when you have no idea that  the other ship
is aiming for you HEAD-ON.




Sigh.

There are four possible modes that a system like this can be working in.

 * True Negative (Unit is silent, no threats nearby)
   This is where the typical FLARM installation will spend almost
   all of its life;  the proverbial NULL state.  As long as you have
   some way of testing whether it's still working, this is where you
   WANT it to spend its entire life.

 * True Positive (Unit is alerting, threat is actually nearby)
   This is where the FLARM is correctly alerting you to a potential
   midair.

 * False positive (Unit is alerting, no threats are actually nearby).
   If FLARM units do this more than a handful of times, they will
   produce an extremely powerful psychological reaction in the pilot,
   who will say, "The unit is dodgy, it doesn't work, I'm turning it
   off."  At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to
   everybody.

 * False negative (Unit silent, actual threat nearby)
   This is at least as dangerous as having no FLARM unit at all,
   possibly more so if the pilot has formed the idea that he can
   compromise his lookout if the FLARM is going to tell him about
   midairs anyway.

For a FLARM to be 100% reliable, there would need to be 0 incidences
of the last two categories.

Currently we can probably guess that the false positive category
is pretty low, because anecdotal evidence about the usefulness of
FLARM seems positive, and if the people telling the anecdotes had
been pissed off by errors and turned it off they wouldn't be raving
about its virtues.

But we presently have no data whatsoever about the false negative
category.

Would FLARM be worth installing if the possibility of a false negative
was greater than the possibility of a true positive?  I'd think not.

Mike B reckons the ATSB is comfortable with ADS-B having a 25% false
negative rate (because it's only expected to prevent 75% of midairs).
Do we have any data whatsoever on whether FLARM's false negative
rate exceeds that of ADS-B ?

We need that data to evaluate it.  The data isn't just one of those
things that's nice to have, it's absolutely essential to determine
whether FLARM is an inferior offering to what CASA has in mind for
us.

  - mark


I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Don Ingram]

Mike Borgelt wrote:

At 10:44 AM 5/07/05 +0930, you wrote:


And false negatives are precisely the class of FLARM failure which will
totally fail to be revealed in anecdotal evidence.

 - mark



Presumably if you fly with a few friends and all are FLARM equipped and you
stop getting warnings when from past experience you should have them from
visual observation you will detect the false negatives.

FLARM is electronically  _aided_  VFR, see and avoid, not an IFR system.
Nobody is making claims for prevention of 100% of mid airs or close
encounters, just improvement on the human eye/brain detection/perception
system. The collision detection algorithms were developed by using lots of
real flight logs and I'm sure they have been tweaked since.

User experience seems to be positive. People are getting warnings on
traffic they otherwise wouldn't see. Please everyone read the pdf's on the
FLARM site and the forum.
Let's see what Peter Temple has to say about Vinon. 


These guys have actually got up & done something. That is in itself 
commendable.


However if it is to be come an informal world standard ( and earn them 
lots of money in the process ) then why would you not attempt to lobby 
for the best possible solution if it means a minor adaption that may 
substantially increase the level of detection performance. A commercial 
company will generally be guided by the market requirements if there is 
sufficient co-ordinated useful feedback.


Don
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Brett Kettle]

Double negatives, false positives, Type II errors... Double-sigh (;-)

>At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to everybody
... and that puts us back to exactly where we are now!

> We need that data to evaluate it.  The data isn't just one of those
things that's nice to have, it's absolutely essential to determine
whether FLARM is an inferior offering to what CASA has in mind for
us.
...no we don't, 'cause then the statistically pedantic amongst us would
observe that ADS-B failure rates for GA/Commercial are not likely to be good
indicators of FLARM failure rates in our sport, and we would be no further
down the path to continuous improvement than we are now.

I'd rather pay a grand now for a commercially-manufactured FLARM which will
have marginal but increasingly important benefits as take-up increases, and
trust that the commercially astute manufacturer will give me software
upgrades when experience allows us to tweak the algorithms for even better
reliability.  Seems to me that so long as it's a good direction to be going
in, we should move in that direction, even if we know there will be further
improvements along the way (oops, isn't that just about a definition for
continuous improvement?).

LOL

Brett Kettle 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Newton
Sent: Tuesday, 5 July 2005 11:47 AM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


On 05/07/2005, at 11:03 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:
>
> Double negatives aside  how do you rate the double  
> positive of a warning that DOES occur when you have no idea that  
> the other ship is aiming for you HEAD-ON.



Sigh.

There are four possible modes that a system like this can be working in.

  * True Negative (Unit is silent, no threats nearby)
This is where the typical FLARM installation will spend almost
all of its life;  the proverbial NULL state.  As long as you have
some way of testing whether it's still working, this is where you
WANT it to spend its entire life.

  * True Positive (Unit is alerting, threat is actually nearby)
This is where the FLARM is correctly alerting you to a potential
midair.

  * False positive (Unit is alerting, no threats are actually nearby).
If FLARM units do this more than a handful of times, they will
produce an extremely powerful psychological reaction in the pilot,
who will say, "The unit is dodgy, it doesn't work, I'm turning it
off."  At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to
everybody.

  * False negative (Unit silent, actual threat nearby)
This is at least as dangerous as having no FLARM unit at all,
possibly more so if the pilot has formed the idea that he can
compromise his lookout if the FLARM is going to tell him about
midairs anyway.

For a FLARM to be 100% reliable, there would need to be 0 incidences
of the last two categories.

Currently we can probably guess that the false positive category
is pretty low, because anecdotal evidence about the usefulness of
FLARM seems positive, and if the people telling the anecdotes had
been pissed off by errors and turned it off they wouldn't be raving
about its virtues.

But we presently have no data whatsoever about the false negative
category.

Would FLARM be worth installing if the possibility of a false negative
was greater than the possibility of a true positive?  I'd think not.

Mike B reckons the ATSB is comfortable with ADS-B having a 25% false
negative rate (because it's only expected to prevent 75% of midairs).
Do we have any data whatsoever on whether FLARM's false negative
rate exceeds that of ADS-B ?

We need that data to evaluate it.  The data isn't just one of those
things that's nice to have, it's absolutely essential to determine
whether FLARM is an inferior offering to what CASA has in mind for
us.

   - mark


I tried an internal modem,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  but it hurt when I walked.  Mark Newton
- Voice: +61-4-1620-2223 - Fax: +61-8-82231777 -


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Don Ingram]

I'd rather pay a grand now for a commercially-manufactured FLARM which will
have marginal but increasingly important benefits as take-up increases, and
trust that the commercially astute manufacturer will give me software
upgrades when experience allows us to tweak the algorithms for even better
reliability.  Seems to me that so long as it's a good direction to be going
in, we should move in that direction, even if we know there will be further
improvements along the way (oops, isn't that just about a definition for
continuous improvement?).


As long as the foundations put in place at the start ( That is where we 
are right now & why this is being discussed ) do not preclude the 
process of continuous improvement. VHF AM comms...


Don
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mike Borgelt]

At 12:11 PM 5/07/05 +1000, you wrote:
>Double negatives, false positives, Type II errors... Double-sigh (;-)
>
Carol just pointed out to me that we wear $2000 parachutes that are about
50% effective.
For that matter, spin training seems to be less than 100% effective as is
the whole training system.

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Don Ingram]

Carol just pointed out to me that we wear $2000 parachutes that are about
50% effective.
For that matter, spin training seems to be less than 100% effective as is
the whole training system.


Point is that if the inventor of the parachute could be persuaded to 
increase the odds of survival before releasing them onto the market, 
knowing that they would be in use for many years, knowing that once 
someone had purchased one they wouldn't want to purchase another one in 
two years time, then wouldn't you at least have a crack at it...


There are widely differing opinions at play, that is good. Just let it 
not be apathy that ends up being the decider on what could potentially 
be an emerging world standard.


Cheers

Don

Gotta go do some work less I suffer an unemployment hazard, or worse the 
subsequent cheesed off missus hazard ;-)

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Geoff Kidd]

Mike

Is that a 50% type 2 double negative?

Sigh

Regards

Geoff


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring inAustralia." 


Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:54 PM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM



At 12:11 PM 5/07/05 +1000, you wrote:

Double negatives, false positives, Type II errors... Double-sigh (;-)


Carol just pointed out to me that we wear $2000 parachutes that are about
50% effective.
For that matter, spin training seems to be less than 100% effective as is
the whole training system.

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
 Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring 


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Harry Medlicott]

Speaking as one who had a midair collision when commencing to thermal with a 
glider which had been following a parallel track several hundred meters 
behind and whose presence was obviously unknown to me, resulting in the 
destruction of my uninsured $100,000 glider and me surviving by landing on 
my side in a ploughed paddock 3 seconds after the chute opened

perhaps I am a bit biased. But believe me it could happen to anyone.

Several of my friends have had very near misses with other gliders in a near 
head on situation.


Surprisingly, statistics show that many mid airs occur at times of low 
traffic density when it appears that the Flarm system would be most 
effective. It would not take much to research Australian accidents and 
reasonably estimate how many could have been averted if both aircraft had 
been fitted with Flarms. On my own knowledge,at least half might have been 
avoided.


If the software of  RF Developments design can be updated, why delay?

Its about time GFA took the initiative. Order about 60, or sufficient for a 
reasonable production run. Hire them to pilots who won't buy them for about 
$60 and  make their use mandatory in nationals for a start.  The GFA has 
about one million in funds just earning interest. Pilots can spend many 
thousands on instruments that don't do much more than become visual 
distractions. State associations also have funds sitting around. Its a bit 
like asking.-  How much would you be prepared to spend to have a freshly 
packed chute as you exited an unflyable glider?


Waiting for final, uncontrovertible proof  is a no brainer. We might just 
improve the popularity of our sport even more than by some of the money we 
have wasted recently.


Harry Medlicott




- Original Message - 
From: "Brett Kettle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'" 


Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:11 PM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM



Double negatives, false positives, Type II errors... Double-sigh (;-)


At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to everybody

... and that puts us back to exactly where we are now!


We need that data to evaluate it.  The data isn't just one of those

things that's nice to have, it's absolutely essential to determine
whether FLARM is an inferior offering to what CASA has in mind for
us.
...no we don't, 'cause then the statistically pedantic amongst us would
observe that ADS-B failure rates for GA/Commercial are not likely to be 
good

indicators of FLARM failure rates in our sport, and we would be no further
down the path to continuous improvement than we are now.

I'd rather pay a grand now for a commercially-manufactured FLARM which 
will
have marginal but increasingly important benefits as take-up increases, 
and

trust that the commercially astute manufacturer will give me software
upgrades when experience allows us to tweak the algorithms for even better
reliability.  Seems to me that so long as it's a good direction to be 
going
in, we should move in that direction, even if we know there will be 
further

improvements along the way (oops, isn't that just about a definition for
continuous improvement?).

LOL

Brett Kettle

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark 
Newton

Sent: Tuesday, 5 July 2005 11:47 AM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


On 05/07/2005, at 11:03 AM, Geoff Kidd wrote:


Double negatives aside  how do you rate the double
positive of a warning that DOES occur when you have no idea that
the other ship is aiming for you HEAD-ON.




Sigh.

There are four possible modes that a system like this can be working in.

 * True Negative (Unit is silent, no threats nearby)
   This is where the typical FLARM installation will spend almost
   all of its life;  the proverbial NULL state.  As long as you have
   some way of testing whether it's still working, this is where you
   WANT it to spend its entire life.

 * True Positive (Unit is alerting, threat is actually nearby)
   This is where the FLARM is correctly alerting you to a potential
   midair.

 * False positive (Unit is alerting, no threats are actually nearby).
   If FLARM units do this more than a handful of times, they will
   produce an extremely powerful psychological reaction in the pilot,
   who will say, "The unit is dodgy, it doesn't work, I'm turning it
   off."  At that point the FLARM becomes completely useless to
   everybody.

 * False negative (Unit silent, actual threat nearby)
   This is at least as dangerous as having no FLARM unit at all,
   possibly more so if the pilot has formed the idea that he can
   compromise his lookout if the FLARM is going to tell him about
   midairs anyway.

For a FLARM to be 100% reliable, there would need to be 0 incidences
of th

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mike Borgelt]

At 11:16 AM 5/07/05 +0930, you wrote:
>Mike B reckons the ATSB is comfortable with ADS-B having a 25% false
>negative rate (because it's only expected to prevent 75% of midairs).
>Do we have any data whatsoever on whether FLARM's false negative
>rate exceeds that of ADS-B ?


I didn't say that. That was the result of looking at the midairs that have
occurred since the late 1960's and given the circumstances, whether ADSB
used in an air to air mode would maybe have prevented them.

I found the number prevented rather lower than I would have expected. The
vast majority were in the circuit or close to airfields.

One of the accidents was the two CAA aeroplane drivers who ran into a
thermalling Blanik at Tocumwal shortly after takeoff. ADSB might have
prevented that, FLARM might have prevented that, looking out the windscreen
could have prevented that.

Neither ADSB nor FLARM is ever going to be universal so the issue of false
negatives is rather a red herring, lookout will still be required. There is
a large occurrence of false negatives now with radio use at MBZs.

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[JR]

So the flarm is an audio type alarm. I have seen sailplanes with audio
undercarridge alarms, sitting on their bellies (pilot inside cockpit ) alarm
blaring !So unless it tells you where the threat is coming from, you would
still have to look, and see JR
- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Borgelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring inAustralia."

Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:24 PM
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM


> At 12:11 PM 5/07/05 +1000, you wrote:
> >Double negatives, false positives, Type II errors... Double-sigh (;-)
> >
> Carol just pointed out to me that we wear $2000 parachutes that are about
> 50% effective.
> For that matter, spin training seems to be less than 100% effective as is
> the whole training system.
>
> Mike
> Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
> phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
> fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
> cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
>   Int'l + 61 429 355784
> email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Mike Borgelt]

At 06:10 PM 5/07/05 +0930, you wrote:
>So the flarm is an audio type alarm. I have seen sailplanes with audio
>undercarridge alarms, sitting on their bellies (pilot inside cockpit ) alarm
>blaring !So unless it tells you where the threat is coming from, you would
>still have to look, and see JR

Yes the FLARM display tells you which direction to look and up, down or
level. Even possible to get the voice thing that tells you "traffic 11
o'clock", presumably at the third warning is says "we're gunna die!". We've
had such a voice device for the last 4 years or so and will get it in
production for this season. Not only for possible FLARM use but lots of
other performance related information which will keep your attention
outside. Including a circuit for the landing gear. Your choice of message
including "call x" for the repair.

Would everyone commenting on this please read the FLARM website and look at
the pdf's and  NMEA output description? 

The system is pretty well thought out and no, they don't want third parties
to develop displays that give escape manouevers or detailed displays of
nearby traffic. They specifically state that an alarm should cause you to
look outside and reserve the right to discourage people from using any 3rd
party device that contravenes these guidelines.

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM

[Don Ingram]

I have had a running discussion with FLARM's Urs Rothacher this 
afternoon and he was most helpful with answering some of the concerns 
raised earlier.


I shall seek his permission before posting a précis of the exchange 
sometime tomorrow.


--
Cheers

Don
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[Derek Ruddock]

The general impression I got was that they
worked very well.

In no way can they be regarded as a
substitute for a good lookout, and this point was made very clear at the briefings.

I personally never had an alarm whilst thermalling,
although I understand some pilots did.

 

I had 2 alarms during the course of the contest:
in both cases I had not seen the approaching glider first: 

our paths were not collision courses and avoiding
action was not required. I was, however, pleased that the presence of the other
glider was drawn to my attention before I had noticed it. This alone convinced
me of the value of the FLARM.

 

Quite frankly I rarely looked at it, so I
found it definitely NOT to be a distraction in the cockpit.

 

There are some minor issues regarding the design:
the unit needs a glare shield, and perhaps a different display, as the threats
are displayed on red or green LED’s, and thus present problems to colour
blind pilots. I believe there are also some minor problems to be sorted out
with the software

 

All in all, I believe that the trial was
very successful   

 



-Original
Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Kidd
Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005
1:17 PM
To: Discussion
 of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @
KEEPIT

 



1   
Would anyone care to offer any feedback on how the Flarm trial went at Keepit?





 





   
Did anyone find them useful?





 





2   
Gee it's been comparatively quiet on this forum lately. Doesn't anyone
have anything controversial to say?








___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[RF Developments Pty Ltd]

Title: Message



Derek,
 
How 
long did those AA batteries last?
 
Nigel
 
 
 
 
  
Nigel Andrews

  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek 
  RuddockSent: Friday, November 25, 2005 12:41 PMTo: 
  Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.Subject: RE: 
  [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT
  
  
  The general 
  impression I got was that they worked very well.
  In no way can they be 
  regarded as a substitute for a good lookout, and this point was made very 
  clear at the briefings.
  I personally never 
  had an alarm whilst thermalling, although I understand some pilots 
  did.
   
  I had 2 alarms during 
  the course of the contest: in both cases I had not seen the approaching glider 
  first: 
  our paths were not 
  collision courses and avoiding action was not required. I was, however, 
  pleased that the presence of the other glider was drawn to my attention before 
  I had noticed it. This alone convinced me of the value of the 
  FLARM.
   
  Quite frankly I 
  rarely looked at it, so I found it definitely NOT to be a distraction in the 
  cockpit.
   
  There are some minor 
  issues regarding the design: the unit needs a glare shield, and perhaps a 
  different display, as the threats are displayed on red or green LED’s, and 
  thus present problems to colour blind pilots. I believe there are also some 
  minor problems to be sorted out with the software
   
  All in all, I believe 
  that the trial was very successful   
   
  -Original 
  Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff KiddSent: Friday, 25 November 2005 1:17 
  PMTo: Discussion of issues relating to 
  Soaring in Australia.Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ 
  KEEPIT
   
  
  1    Would anyone care 
  to offer any feedback on how the Flarm trial went at 
  Keepit?
  
   
  
      Did anyone find them 
  useful?
  
   
  
  2    Gee it's 
  been comparatively quiet on this forum lately. Doesn't anyone have 
  anything controversial to 
say?
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[Allan Armistead]

"There are some minor issues regarding the 
design: the unit needs a glare shield, and perhaps a different display, as the 
threats are displayed on red or green LED’s, and thus present problems to colour 
blind pilots."
 
Yes, for us small-but-significant group of pilots with 
a red-green issue, it's a pain in the neck that these colours keep being used. 
But I don't see it getting changed in my lifetime...
 
Allan Armistead ph 
(02) 6249 6470, fax (02) 6249 6555, mobile 0413 013 911 PO Box 908, Dickson ACT 2602, Australia 
"When once you have tasted flight, you will always 
walk with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you always 
will be." 
Leonardo da Vinci, 1452-1519 

  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Derek 
  RuddockSent: Friday, 25 November 2005 13:41To: 
  Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.Subject: RE: 
  [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT
  
  
  The general 
  impression I got was that they worked very well.
  In no way can they be 
  regarded as a substitute for a good lookout, and this point was made very 
  clear at the briefings.
  I personally never 
  had an alarm whilst thermalling, although I understand some pilots 
  did.
   
  I had 2 alarms during 
  the course of the contest: in both cases I had not seen the approaching glider 
  first: 
  our paths were not 
  collision courses and avoiding action was not required. I was, however, 
  pleased that the presence of the other glider was drawn to my attention before 
  I had noticed it. This alone convinced me of the value of the 
  FLARM.
   
  Quite frankly I 
  rarely looked at it, so I found it definitely NOT to be a distraction in the 
  cockpit.
   
  There are some minor 
  issues regarding the design: the unit needs a glare shield, and perhaps a 
  different display, as the threats are displayed on red or green LED’s, and 
  thus present problems to colour blind pilots. I believe there are also some 
  minor problems to be sorted out with the software
   
  All in all, I believe 
  that the trial was very successful   
   
  -Original 
  Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff KiddSent: Friday, 25 November 2005 1:17 
  PMTo: Discussion of issues relating to 
  Soaring in Australia.Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ 
  KEEPIT
   
  
  1    Would anyone care 
  to offer any feedback on how the Flarm trial went at 
  Keepit?
  
   
  
      Did anyone find them 
  useful?
  
   
  
  2    Gee it's 
  been comparatively quiet on this forum lately. Doesn't anyone have 
  anything controversial to 
say?
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[Derek Ruddock]

Title: Message









2 days: By the end of the flight the next
day the power led was flashing , but the unit still registered other gliders.  

 

Nigel, I think the unit would be improved
immensely by the addition of a LCD display instead of the LED’s (and a glareshield…),
plus a voice option instead of the alarm (“traffic 12 high…”)



Derek 



-Original
Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RF Developments Pty Ltd
Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005
3:04 PM
To: 'Discussion
 of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @
KEEPIT

 



Derek,





 





How long
did those AA batteries last?





 





Nigel





 





 





 





 



  

Nigel Andrews



-Original Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Ruddock
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005
12:41 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating
to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @
KEEPIT



The
general impression I got was that they worked very well.

In no
way can they be regarded as a substitute for a good lookout, and this point was
made very clear at the briefings.

I
personally never had an alarm whilst thermalling, although I understand some
pilots did.

 

I had 2
alarms during the course of the contest: in both cases I had not seen the approaching
glider first: 

our
paths were not collision courses and avoiding action was not required. I was,
however, pleased that the presence of the other glider was drawn to my
attention before I had noticed it. This alone convinced me of the value of the FLARM.

 

Quite
frankly I rarely looked at it, so I found it definitely NOT to be a distraction
in the cockpit.

 

There
are some minor issues regarding the design: the unit needs a glare shield, and
perhaps a different display, as the threats are displayed on red or green
LED’s, and thus present problems to colour blind pilots. I believe there
are also some minor problems to be sorted out with the software

 

All in
all, I believe that the trial was very successful   

 



-Original
Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Kidd
Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005
1:17 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating
to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @
KEEPIT

 



1   
Would anyone care to offer any feedback on how the Flarm trial went at Keepit?





 





   
Did anyone find them useful?





 





2   
Gee it's been comparatively quiet on this forum lately. Doesn't anyone
have anything controversial to say?










___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[Jason and Jemima Armistead]

Derek, Nigel and Dad

Eventually I'm sure that someone will come up with a system that mounts 
right on your glasses and gives a warning signal straight to your eyes, or 
generates some sort of virtual heads-up display overlayed on your view of 
the world.


In the meantime, LEDs are now available in white, blue, red, green and 
orange.  So perhaps a non-standard colour set is suitable for those who are 
colourblind red and green ?  I only observed the FLARM units briefly, and 
maybe if multi-colour LEDs are used this is still a problem if you needed 
to mount 2 or more LEDs where only one multicolour one is used in a 
"normal" FLARM display.


As for my $0.02 worth, although I spent 5 hours wishing I could die instead 
of puking over and over again while riding in the back of the DG-1000 (not 
sure if it was dehydration, something that I ate, or perhaps not being used 
to continued 2G turns in gaggles while swivelling my head to watch all the 
other traffic ?), I think that a FLARM repeater display in the back of a 
two seater would be useful so that the workload could be shared amongst 
both pilots.


Jason

At 03:45 PM 25/11/2005, you wrote:

Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_=_NextPart_001_01C5F17B.0685231D"

2 days: By the end of the flight the next day the power led was flashing , 
but the unit still registered other gliders.


Nigel, I think the unit would be improved immensely by the addition of a 
LCD display instead of the LED’s (and a glareshield…), plus a voice option 
instead of the alarm (“traffic 12 high…”)

Derek
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RF 
Developments Pty Ltd

Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005 3:04 PM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

Derek,

How long did those AA batteries last?

Nigel






Nigel Andrews
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Ruddock

Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 12:41 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT
The general impression I got was that they worked very well.
In no way can they be regarded as a substitute for a good lookout, and 
this point was made very clear at the briefings.
I personally never had an alarm whilst thermalling, although I understand 
some pilots did.


I had 2 alarms during the course of the contest: in both cases I had not 
seen the approaching glider first:
our paths were not collision courses and avoiding action was not required. 
I was, however, pleased that the presence of the other glider was drawn to 
my attention before I had noticed it. This alone convinced me of the value 
of the FLARM.


Quite frankly I rarely looked at it, so I found it definitely NOT to be a 
distraction in the cockpit.


There are some minor issues regarding the design: the unit needs a glare 
shield, and perhaps a different display, as the threats are displayed on 
red or green LED’s, and thus present problems to colour blind pilots. I 
believe there are also some minor problems to be sorted out with the software


All in all, I believe that the trial was very successful

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Kidd

Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005 1:17 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

1Would anyone care to offer any feedback on how the Flarm trial went 
at Keepit?


Did anyone find them useful?

2Gee it's been comparatively quiet on this forum lately. Doesn't 
anyone have anything controversial to say?


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring





___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[Allan Armistead]

Jason, I suspect it was the combination of 2G turns in the gaggles plus not
doing the flying that was the problem. Not doing the flying when I'm in a
two seater is one of the worst things I can do. Perhaps that's another of
those little things that got passed along in the genes... Fortunately colour
blindness passes on from the mother's side so you have avoided that one.

Allan Armistead
ph (02) 6249 6470, fax (02) 6249 6555, mobile 0413 013 911
PO Box 908, Dickson ACT 2602, Australia

"When once you have tasted flight, you will always walk with your eyes
turned skyward, for there you have been and there you always will be."
Leonardo da Vinci, 1452-1519


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jason
and Jemima Armistead
Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005 18:17
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT


Derek, Nigel and Dad

Eventually I'm sure that someone will come up with a system that mounts
right on your glasses and gives a warning signal straight to your eyes, or
generates some sort of virtual heads-up display overlayed on your view of
the world.

In the meantime, LEDs are now available in white, blue, red, green and
orange.  So perhaps a non-standard colour set is suitable for those who are
colourblind red and green ?  I only observed the FLARM units briefly, and
maybe if multi-colour LEDs are used this is still a problem if you needed
to mount 2 or more LEDs where only one multicolour one is used in a
"normal" FLARM display.

As for my $0.02 worth, although I spent 5 hours wishing I could die instead
of puking over and over again while riding in the back of the DG-1000 (not
sure if it was dehydration, something that I ate, or perhaps not being used
to continued 2G turns in gaggles while swivelling my head to watch all the
other traffic ?), I think that a FLARM repeater display in the back of a
two seater would be useful so that the workload could be shared amongst
both pilots.

Jason

At 03:45 PM 25/11/2005, you wrote:
>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="_=_NextPart_001_01C5F17B.0685231D"
>
>2 days: By the end of the flight the next day the power led was flashing ,
>but the unit still registered other gliders.
>
>Nigel, I think the unit would be improved immensely by the addition of a
>LCD display instead of the LED’s (and a glareshield…), plus a voice option
>instead of the alarm (“traffic 12 high…”)
>Derek
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RF
>Developments Pty Ltd
>Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005 3:04 PM
>To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
>Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT
>
>Derek,
>
>How long did those AA batteries last?
>
>Nigel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Nigel Andrews
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek
Ruddock
>Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 12:41 PM
>To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
>Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT
>The general impression I got was that they worked very well.
>In no way can they be regarded as a substitute for a good lookout, and
>this point was made very clear at the briefings.
>I personally never had an alarm whilst thermalling, although I understand
>some pilots did.
>
>I had 2 alarms during the course of the contest: in both cases I had not
>seen the approaching glider first:
>our paths were not collision courses and avoiding action was not required.
>I was, however, pleased that the presence of the other glider was drawn to
>my attention before I had noticed it. This alone convinced me of the value
>of the FLARM.
>
>Quite frankly I rarely looked at it, so I found it definitely NOT to be a
>distraction in the cockpit.
>
>There are some minor issues regarding the design: the unit needs a glare
>shield, and perhaps a different display, as the threats are displayed on
>red or green LED’s, and thus present problems to colour blind pilots. I
>believe there are also some minor problems to be sorted out with the
software
>
>All in all, I believe that the trial was very successful
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Kidd
>Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005 1:17 PM
>To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
>Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT
>
>1Would anyone care to offer any feedback on how the Flarm trial went
>at Keepit?
>
> Did anyone find them useful?
>
>2Gee it's been comparatively quiet on this forum lately. Doesn't
>anyone have anything controv

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[mark king]

 issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

Derek,

How long did those AA batteries last?

Nigel






Nigel Andrews
-Original Message-
From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derek Ruddock

Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 12:41 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT
The general impression I got was that they worked very well.
In no way can they be regarded as a substitute 
for a good lookout, and this point was made very clear at the briefings.
I personally never had an alarm whilst 
thermalling, although I understand some pilots did.


I had 2 alarms during the course of the 
contest: in both cases I had not seen the approaching glider first:
our paths were not collision courses and 
avoiding action was not required. I was, 
however, pleased that the presence of the other 
glider was drawn to my attention before I had 
noticed it. This alone convinced me of the value of the FLARM.


Quite frankly I rarely looked at it, so I found 
it definitely NOT to be a distraction in the cockpit.


There are some minor issues regarding the 
design: the unit needs a glare shield, and 
perhaps a different display, as the threats are 
displayed on red or green LED’s, and thus 
present problems to colour blind pilots. I 
believe there are also some minor problems to be sorted out with the software


All in all, I believe that the trial was very successful

-Original Message-
From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Kidd

Sent: Friday, 25 November 2005 1:17 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

1Would anyone care to offer any feedback on 
how the Flarm trial went at Keepit?


Did anyone find them useful?

2Gee it's been comparatively quiet on this 
forum lately. Doesn't anyone have anything controversial to say?


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring





___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[Paul]

mark king wrote:
I feel I have to add my views on the comments flying around about colour 
vision and flying.



CASA as it now is, years ago lost the fight to stop pilots with so 
called colour perception issues from flying at night thanks to the court 
action taken by Dr Pape. See www.aopa.com.au for his excellent paper on 
the history of the so called colour vision standard and his fight for 
fair play by CASA. The view of CASA up till then was that somehow it was 
unsafe for pilots who failed the colour perception test to fly at night 
but safe for them to fly around during the day or in thick cloud. You 
could be flying through the thickest cloud imaginable during day time 
but as soon as last light hit it was unsafe somehow? bizarre to say the 
least 


Maybe not as bizarre as you think, if you cannot see past the 
windscreen, correct colour vision is hardly of much importance.  On the 
other hand, not being able to see if the plane beyond your windscreen is 
coming or going just might.  I have missed out on an Air Traffic control 
job in the early seventies due to the red-green colour blindness.  In 
the end it was not the inability to read the colour charts, but rather 
the inability to distinguish between pin sources of white, red and green 
light.  Whether or not such caution was justified is another issue.


Kind regards

Paul
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM @ KEEPIT

[Graeme Cant]

From: Jason and Jemima Armistead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


As for my $0.02 worth, although I spent 5 hours wishing I could die instead 
of puking over and over again while riding in the back of the DG-1000 (not 
sure if it was dehydration, something that I ate, or perhaps not being used 
to continued 2G turns in gaggles while swivelling my head to watch all the 
other traffic ?)


No.  I think it comes with the territory, Jason - where the territory is the 
back seat of a high performance two-seater.  You have all my heart 
(stomach?) felt sympathy.  The Orion isn't too bad but as the proportion of 
dolphining rises (DG1000, ASH25), the barf factor moves up exponentially.


Cheers,
Graeme Cant


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[Mike Borgelt]

At 09:11 AM 9/11/2006, you wrote:

I think it will happen one day - I think it is inevitable. But I also
think it is 20 years away. That might be pessimistic, but in other
ways it is also very optimistic :-)

FLARM has not been around long enough to have statistics to prove the
safety - therefore it is all predictions. It is a shame but that is
the way of life - we have to make a guess (albeit educated) then get
the stats.

However - it is statistics that show that most inflight glider
accidents are glider to glider - not other aircraft.

But we really need to squash this myth that you must have all
aircraft with them before there is increased safety. I am not sure
how that started but it is HIGHLY incorrect ! By all account it makes
no sense, statistically or logically. Every extra aircraft to have a
FLARM (flying in the same area of course) increases safety. Having
all would of course be a dream come true - but don't hold your
breath. Some gliders still don't carry radio and we know that adds to
safety. We will have aircraft in the skys for a long time without a
common collision avoidance - but it will be within most of our lives
that I think we will see that change :-)

Scott


Here's a simple analysis of the problem:

Suppose we have 10 gliders/tugs  in this group. This would seem to be 
a typical medium sized club situation on any given day.


Each glider/tug can collide with 9 others making 90 collision pairs.

However zero and one is the same as one and zero (and so on), so we 
have 90/2 unique collision pairs = 45


If one glider is FLARM equipped then this is obviously trivial and 
all collision pairs are effectively non FLARM 10% fit 0% effective


Similarly if all are FLARM equipped then 100% of the collision pairs 
are FLARM equipped.   100%   100%


If 2 gliders are FLARM equipped only one pair is a FLARM pair which 
leaves 44 non FLARM pairs.  20%4.4%


If 3 Gliders are FLARM equipped  3 pairs are 
FLARM   42 
non   30%6.7%


If 
4 6 
 39 
40%13.3%


If 
5 10 
35 
50% 22.2%


If 
6 15 
30 
60%33.3%


If 
7 21 
24 
70% 46.7%


If 
8 28 
17 
80% 62.2%


If 
9 36 
  9 
90% 80%


Notice that you need to equip over 70% of the fleet to reduce the 
risk of a non FLARM interaction by 50%


Notice also how the number of possible interactions increases rapidly 
with number of gliders. There's a lesson there about how many of your 
mates you want to have a rat race with (or share a thermal with).


Note that your personal risk of a non FLARM interaction goes down 
linearly as the percentage of FLARM equipped gliders increases if you 
have a FLARM.


Note also the non FLARM equipped power traffic reduces the "% of 
fleet equipped" number so the overall risk is as in the first table. 
The only question is how many power planes are out there.


Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[John Wharington]

On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 10:12 +1000, Mike Borgelt wrote:
> 
> Note that your personal risk of a non FLARM interaction goes down 
> linearly as the percentage of FLARM equipped gliders increases if you 
> have a FLARM. 

That's the important point though for people considering opting in to
the FLARM system: if you have one, and 50% of gliders have them, you
have 50% effectiveness.

Obviously if you don't have FLARM, it's not going to help you, so your
stats are misleadingly pessimistic there as you are assuming the chance
you have a FLARM is proportional to the entire fleet having one.

Since many of the early adopters have been competition pilots,
experienced XC pilots, and busy clubs, the effectiveness is probably
even greater than a country-wide poll would suggest as there are many
gliders in remote clubs that rarely fly or rarely fly cross country, and
thereby don't normally pose as much of a risk to other gliders.





___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[Mike Borgelt]

At 12:47 AM 11/11/2006, you wrote:

On Fri, 2006-11-10 at 10:12 +1000, Mike Borgelt wrote:
>
> Note that your personal risk of a non FLARM interaction goes down
> linearly as the percentage of FLARM equipped gliders increases if you
> have a FLARM.

That's the important point though for people considering opting in to
the FLARM system: if you have one, and 50% of gliders have them, you
have 50% effectiveness.


Effectiveness for what? Warnings? Or prevention of mid airs? Not 
necessarily the same thing.
Somewhat less than 100% effectiveness against mid airs would be a 
reasonable assumption.




Obviously if you don't have FLARM, it's not going to help you, so your
stats are misleadingly pessimistic there as you are assuming the chance
you have a FLARM is proportional to the entire fleet having one.



I thought I covered the assumptions quite adequately and note I was 
talking about a group of ten who were potential collision risks and 
the way the warning effectiveness changed with numbers fitted for the 
fleet. I did also distinguish between the fleet risk and your 
personal risk if you fitted a FLARM.


The invention of FLARM was driven by the problem in the European Alps 
where there are hundreds, if not thousands of gliders flying out of 
numerous sites, with pilots who speak different languages (even if 
you speak the other guys language face to face it's much harder on 
the radio - I found Texan was difficult for a few days) where the 
radio is likely to be nothing but heterodyne squeal due to the number 
of people on the frequency and of limited use anyway and where the 
lift band is a narrow area close to the mountainside leading to 
numerous 150 - 200 knot head on closing encounters with the pilots 
spending a fair bit of their time and attention avoiding hitting the 
mountain. Gliders closing head on at those speeds is a more difficult 
problem than two Boeing 737's at cruise closing head on. Under those 
circumstances I would expect a goodly reduction in mid airs between 
gliders if FLARM is used. Note that this is also a case where there 
are likely to be few powered aircraft who for now are not FLARM equipped.


This is a somewhat different situation from thermal soaring cross 
country in a group over flat ground which is where 4  glider - glider 
mid airs have occured in Oz in the last 10 years . Given the very 
high false alarm rate FLARM has under the thermal joining/gaggling 
cases and that these pilots had every reason to know there were other 
gliders in proximity I have doubts that all of these would have been 
prevented by FLARM.


What I find interesting is the radio chatter associated with FLARM. 
"Do you see me?" " No but I think I've got you on my FLARM".


I wish I could believe that having the FLARM aid will free pilots to 
look out for other targets but I fear that humans don't work that 
way. The subconscious thinking will be "I've taken care of the 
majority of the risk, the rest is very small, back to the PDA display".


The Avweb article I linked to had a few things to say about human 
factors engineering as well as other things. I see PDA's in cockpits 
obscuring important parts of transparencies and the discussion here 
over the last few days about PDA's stopping is interesting. How good 
is your lookout while being distracted by these? Carol calls them 
Pilot Distraction Articles(PDA).


Mike



Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[Bruce Taylor]

Not so silly as it sounds... Usually we carry way 
too much rubbish in the cockpit, and spend too much time playing with it. I 
recently stuck my head into a brand new cockpit and found 2 x Glide computers, 2 
x PDA systems, a Flarm, plus all the usual extras - the panel was full to 
overflowing!
 
I am certain it doesn't make this 
particular pilot go any faster, and I'd prefer not to fly anywhere near 
him, Flarm equipped or not. You simply don't need all that stuff, and what you 
do have should be as sorted as possible pre-flight.
 
As a further comment on Flarms, as many comp pilots 
will have found, just to have it running in the background as a reminder that 
you are not alone is a huge incentive to keep the lookout happening. In time the 
constant warnings in gaggles will be tuned out. A couple of years ago I had a 
really near miss (probably about 10 metres) with Tony Tabart at a Qld Easter 
comps. Nobody's fault really, just an odd vagary of AATs caught us both out. A 
Flarm would have prevented this way before it scared us half to death, so I 
love mine!
 
BT

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Mal 
  To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net 
  
  Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 9:33 
  AM
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths
  
   
  Mike,
   
  I did not see any calculation for the glider 
  having a flat battery.
   
  Due running the radio, FLARM, IPAC, Cambridge 
  or Borgelt instruments!
   
  Regards Mal
   
  www.mals.net
  
  

  ___Aus-soaring mailing 
  listAus-soaring@lists.internode.on.netTo 
  check or change subscription details, visit:http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[Scott Penrose]

On 11/11/2006, at 15:19, Bruce Taylor wrote: Not so silly as it sounds... Usually we carry way too much rubbish in the cockpit, and spend too much time playing with it. I recently stuck my head into a brand new cockpit and found 2 x Glide computers, 2 x PDA systems, a Flarm, plus all the usual extras - the panel was full to overflowing!this is why I love my Vega - not only a great audio vario, but Flarm is all done by voice ! No looking down. infact I have hidden my flarm up the front to completely remove temptation. It even tells me wheel not down and battery low. so pretty much I only look at my organiser for direction (and with XCsoar that is very fast, just make line go up).In my flying I have only once spent some time changing things (had a problem with my saved tasks being wrong) that put my head in the cockpit for a while - dangerously so - so I did some clearing turns regularly and worked as fast as I could.Audio variable is required for comps now - and I can see the time that we may consider similar for Flarm.Scott___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[David Griffiths]

Tells us a bit more about your Vega Scott.I'm interested in finding more about it and how you have connected in your cockpit.On 11/14/06, Scott Penrose
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/11/2006, at 15:19, Bruce Taylor wrote: Not so silly as it sounds... Usually we carry way too much rubbish in the cockpit, and spend too much time playing with it. I recently stuck my head into a brand new cockpit and found 2 x Glide computers, 2 x PDA systems, a Flarm, plus all the usual extras - the panel was full to overflowing!
this is why I love my Vega - not only a great audio vario, but Flarm is all done by voice ! No looking down. infact I have hidden my flarm up the front to completely remove temptation. It even tells me wheel not down and battery low. so pretty much I only look at my organiser for direction (and with XCsoar that is very fast, just make line go up).
In my flying I have only once spent some time changing things (had a problem with my saved tasks being wrong) that put my head in the cockpit for a while - dangerously so - so I did some clearing turns regularly and worked as fast as I could.
Audio variable is required for comps now - and I can see the time that we may consider similar for Flarm.Scott
___Aus-soaring mailing listAus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
-- David GriffithsCreative Programming0427 197 606
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[David Griffiths]

I am impressedI did not even know that this type of gear was available.Is this all prototype stuff or is it in production?On 11/14/06, Scott Penrose
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On 14/11/2006, at 16:54, David Griffiths wrote:
> Tells us a bit more about your Vega Scott.> I'm interested in finding more about it and how you have connected> in your cockpit.Here is my old cockpit layout in the Cobra. The new layout (sorry,
don't have a picture) has the organiser stuck with velcro over theold averager (top left).Here is the Vega itself - I have a proper ring around it now though,so it looks much nicer.
as you can see it fits into a small instrument slot.On the back you connect:* 12 volt power in - with a fuse of course* 4 pressure inputs- Static- pitot- TE- Stall (I don't have this connected yet, as it requires drilling a
hole i my glider).* output to speaker* separate output to headphones* output from radio goes into the back (the audio voice, vario andradio is all mixed through the one speaker).* 5 volt power output and serial connection to my organiser (it
provides the 5 volts & serial connection)* Flarm or other Gps or other logger connection - provides the 12volt power   (the Nmea from the Gps is mixed with the vega & flarm messages tothe organiser automatically)
* Airframe switches - flaps (not for me of course - I don't haveany), trim position, gear, extra buttons on the stick* Temperature and humidity sensors.Here is my stickBuilt in is also 2 accelerometers.
Some of the features that are programmable include:* Absolutely anything to do with Audio, including volume and speedand pitch and ramps for each - allowing each of those to change withamount of lift.
* Volume of vario during radio in and out - if I get an incomingradio i dull mine to quiet, but I can still hear it - you can turn itof altogether.* level of TE mix - e.g. you can choose the % of calculated (pitot
and accelerometer compensated static) and actual (TE) - 80/20 forexample.   (i see a time when we probably won't bother with te, but I couldbe wrong there)* meaning (input, event and output) of each airframe and stick buttons
* lots lots more...In flight now I have started to turn off my old vario because I findI occasionally look at it, and I really don't need to - so it is justusing power. There is a live and average etc displayed on the PDA but
i find I am really only using the 30 second average and total thermalaverage.In flight I just use the stick for:* repeat message & change display* acknowledge message* holding the above two controls the flarm warning levels (
e.g.lowering the level of threat during early gaggles in a comp)* drop marker* next waypoint - it is automatic on the PDA but if I want to justhead home, I can click that a couple of times to skip around to home
- or if I want to choose when to turn on the AAT I can select it thatway.* on the vega itself I use one switch if I want to force cruise/climb(otherwise it is automatic depending on the position of my trim) and
to set my MacCready (it sets it both internally for cruise speednoise and sends it through to the PDA).Here are some links:Manufacturers: http://www.triadis.ch/index.php?vega
(although one of the designers is here in Melbourne)rf supplies vega & altair http://www.rf-developments.com/page_1143080341671.html(altair is a glass cockpit)
XCSoar support for vega http://www.xcsoar.org/mediawiki/index.php/Hardware/Vario/VegaHappy and safe soaring everyone !Scott
___Aus-soaring mailing listAus-soaring@lists.internode.on.netTo check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring-- David GriffithsCreative Programming
0427 197 606
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[Scott Penrose]

On 14/11/2006, at 19:46, David Griffiths wrote:


I am impressed
I did not even know that this type of gear was available.
Is this all prototype stuff or is it in production?


Mine is a prototype, but they went into production in about January  
this year - i believer there are about 20 of them in Australia now,  
but don't quote me on that.


Scott

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM maths

[plchampness]

Dear Scott,

How much does the Vega cost?  Since the Cobra Instrument binnacle was full 
already how did you fit it all in and still have room to get into the cockpit 
yourself?

Peter Champness


 Scott Penrose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> 
> On 14/11/2006, at 19:46, David Griffiths wrote:
> 
> > I am impressed
> > I did not even know that this type of gear was available.
> > Is this all prototype stuff or is it in production?
> 
> Mine is a prototype, but they went into production in about January  
> this year - i believer there are about 20 of them in Australia now,  
> but don't quote me on that.
> 
> Scott
> 
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Mike Borgelt]

This started as a comment about wider applicability of the technology 
to the wider GA community.


AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED the flarm units are not that suitable due to 
reduced range and airframe shielding issues which Nigel himself 
mentioned in a private email to me as a result of an earlier post of 
mine on this group. To get good performance in these aircraft 
external antennas are necessary. He also mentioned that there were 
some issues with reduced performance due to airframe shielding on 
carbon gliders. I wasn't aware that this was much of a problem in 
gliders until he himself mentioned the new canopy antenna which would 
hopefully address these issues, on this group. I find this somewhat 
disappointing in view of the large numbers of Flarms sold in Europe 
prior to their adoption here. Then again, head on in the Alps, wings 
level, the airframe shielding is probably minimal and Flarm 
performance most satisfactory against the primary collision threat.


Back to the GA aircraft.

Now pretty obviously a unit that just installs on top of the 
instrument panel in a Cessa and plugs in to the cigarette lighter is 
going to be more rapidly and widely adopted than one which requires 
the services of an an avionics tech and some CASA paperwork. Likewise 
for the commuter airline folks. Unfortunately it appears that the 
simple installation won't work well in these cases and these 
installations will be more complex and expensive. Pity.


Someone might like to get the German article I linked to translated. 
My Google attempt resulted in only half the article being translated. 
A couple of guys with Flarms got a nasty fright and could easily have 
collided when flying in cross country in company.


Back when I flew contests everyone was very worried about the mid air 
risk but on thinking about it the major worry was the thrashing 
around in broken lift in large gaggles pre start where there 
were  too many gliders to keep track of.  With the best will in the 
world it was always possible for a potential collision to  eventuate 
and then someone taking evasive action could cause another. Apart 
from the odd oaf who entered thermals by pointing his glider at one 
already in it (we knew who they were, mostly), enroute wasn't such a 
worry as the traffic density was lower and gliders ahead of you were 
potential thermal markers so it was in everyone's interest to look 
for these. In the 10 or 11 years of flying State and National level 
FAI contests (7) I don't remember anyone actually having a mid air. 
These were contests with up to 81 gliders. Maybe it was just a 
statistical quiet period due to chance.


I'm finding the defensive reactions to any criticism of Flarm 
fascinating. Reminds me of the reactions when human caused climate 
change is questioned. A few years ago a social scientist was embedded 
with a bunch of climate modellers for 5 years. They expressed high 
confidence in their climate models *except* for the bit they were 
each personally responsible for which they thought had uncertainties! 
Something to do with a well documented techological phenomenon where 
the people slightly further away from understanding the technology 
have more faith in it than the inventors.


Mike








Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[David Lawley]

Re defensiveness, spot on Mike.

It was so obvious I even invented a word for it flarmnatics!

Recently on this list, Mark Newton asked a very good question about threat
priorities of FLARM, (see below) and only got replies stating the bleeding
obvious about lookout, not one reply that I saw addressed the question.

Post said:

>Previously if you were in a thermal or level flight with other 
> aircraft (more than one LED lit) and an alarm went off, the alarmed 
> LED would flash but additionally the other aircraft would still be 
> lit, the flashing LED was hard to see and confused by the other LEDS 
> also being lit. Now if you get an alarm, only the alarmed LED will be 
> on and the others will disappear for the duration of the alarm - no
>confusion.

Mark said

>>Sounds like a positive change, with one caveat:  What happens if there's
>>more than one simultaneous collision risk?  Does it show the first one
>>detected, the most recent one detected, or all of them?

Interestingly the people I have spoken to who have the most reservations are
all experienced, expert people in the Electronic/Computer tech field, who
are well aware of the often unforeseen problems associated with any new
technology.
 
Whilst I think the idea has some promise I like some others fear complacency
about lookout becoming an issue in the long term. 
Even in comps where FLARM is mandated one could easily come across a glider
from another site which is not fitted with FLARM. 

Regards

Dave L




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
Borgelt
Sent: Wednesday, 31 January 2007 2:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring
in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna




This started as a comment about wider applicability of the technology 
to the wider GA community.

AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED the flarm units are not that suitable due to 
reduced range and airframe shielding issues which Nigel himself 
mentioned in a private email to me as a result of an earlier post of 
mine on this group. To get good performance in these aircraft 
external antennas are necessary. He also mentioned that there were 
some issues with reduced performance due to airframe shielding on 
carbon gliders. I wasn't aware that this was much of a problem in 
gliders until he himself mentioned the new canopy antenna which would 
hopefully address these issues, on this group. I find this somewhat 
disappointing in view of the large numbers of Flarms sold in Europe 
prior to their adoption here. Then again, head on in the Alps, wings 
level, the airframe shielding is probably minimal and Flarm 
performance most satisfactory against the primary collision threat.

Back to the GA aircraft.

Now pretty obviously a unit that just installs on top of the 
instrument panel in a Cessa and plugs in to the cigarette lighter is 
going to be more rapidly and widely adopted than one which requires 
the services of an an avionics tech and some CASA paperwork. Likewise 
for the commuter airline folks. Unfortunately it appears that the 
simple installation won't work well in these cases and these 
installations will be more complex and expensive. Pity.

Someone might like to get the German article I linked to translated. 
My Google attempt resulted in only half the article being translated. 
A couple of guys with Flarms got a nasty fright and could easily have 
collided when flying in cross country in company.

Back when I flew contests everyone was very worried about the mid air 
risk but on thinking about it the major worry was the thrashing 
around in broken lift in large gaggles pre start where there 
were  too many gliders to keep track of.  With the best will in the 
world it was always possible for a potential collision to  eventuate 
and then someone taking evasive action could cause another. Apart 
from the odd oaf who entered thermals by pointing his glider at one 
already in it (we knew who they were, mostly), enroute wasn't such a 
worry as the traffic density was lower and gliders ahead of you were 
potential thermal markers so it was in everyone's interest to look 
for these. In the 10 or 11 years of flying State and National level 
FAI contests (7) I don't remember anyone actually having a mid air. 
These were contests with up to 81 gliders. Maybe it was just a 
statistical quiet period due to chance.

I'm finding the defensive reactions to any criticism of Flarm 
fascinating. Reminds me of the reactions when human caused climate 
change is questioned. A few years ago a social scientist was embedded 
with a bunch of climate modellers for 5 years. They expressed high 
confidence in their climate models *except* for the bit they were 
each personally responsible for which they thought had uncertainties! 
Something to do with a well documented techological phenomenon where 
the people slightly further away f

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Ben Jones]

The same could be said for a handheld gps mounted on your leg plenty of 
shielding from the Aircraft , depending on the position of sats to the 
reciever having said that a hand held vhf radio will also fall into 
this catagory, infact just about any radio Tx or Rx device will be effected 
in loss of signal strenght somewhere.


If the product works straight out of the box and is slapped on your 
glareshield with a little dedgredation of signal strength which still is 
withing the allowable limits  then it has been sold or advertised correctly, 
If the owner/pilot is aware that if you want a little bit of extra signal 
the buy a external antenna...same applies to GPS's or VHF's


Nigel keep up the R+D work.

Regards

Ben




- Original Message - 
From: "nandrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna



What are you going on about Mike? No one said the existing antenna was not
working and it is fine for most installations out of the box which is what
we have used for the last 14 months. In some cases Carbon fibre fuses can
block SOME of the signal, not all of it AND in some cases cross 
polarization
has an effect - BUT does not stop the signal, it reduces the range 



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Chad Nowak]

Being one that has had Flarm alert me to a serious situtation before I'd 
like to say thankyou to you Nigel for putting up with all you do and making 
this not only avalible to us but also continuing to build and improve the 
product.  Keep it up and I'm sure some time in the future we won't be 
arguing about such a silly topic.


Now let me get back to my Flarm equipped glider so I can relaxe and close my 
eyes.


Chad Nowak


From: "Ben Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia."
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"Discussion of issues relating 
to Soaring in Australia."

Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:03:06 +0900

The same could be said for a handheld gps mounted on your leg plenty of 
shielding from the Aircraft , depending on the position of sats to the 
reciever having said that a hand held vhf radio will also fall into 
this catagory, infact just about any radio Tx or Rx device will be effected 
in loss of signal strenght somewhere.


If the product works straight out of the box and is slapped on your 
glareshield with a little dedgredation of signal strength which still is 
withing the allowable limits  then it has been sold or advertised 
correctly, If the owner/pilot is aware that if you want a little bit of 
extra signal the buy a external antenna...same applies to GPS's or 
VHF's


Nigel keep up the R+D work.

Regards

Ben




- Original Message - From: "nandrews" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna



What are you going on about Mike? No one said the existing antenna was not
working and it is fine for most installations out of the box which is what
we have used for the last 14 months. In some cases Carbon fibre fuses can
block SOME of the signal, not all of it AND in some cases cross 
polarization

has an effect - BUT does not stop the signal, it reduces the range



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


_
Join the millions of Australians using Live Search. Try live.com.au 
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=740&referral=million&URL=http://live.com.au


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Mike Borgelt]

At 08:35 PM 31/01/2007, you wrote:
Being one that has had Flarm alert me to a serious situtation before 
I'd like to say thankyou to you Nigel for putting up with all you do 
and making this not only avalible to us but also continuing to build 
and improve the product.  Keep it up and I'm sure some time in the 
future we won't be arguing about such a silly topic.


Now let me get back to my Flarm equipped glider so I can relaxe and 
close my eyes.


Chad Nowak


Well don't keep us all in suspense. What was it?

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Chad Nowak]

Mike Wrote:
Well don't keep us all in suspense. What was it?


Which ever glider is not booked at the club (since they are all Flarm 
equiped)


Chad Nowak



From: Mike Borgelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia."
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia."

Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 06:47:37 +1000

At 08:35 PM 31/01/2007, you wrote:
Being one that has had Flarm alert me to a serious situtation before I'd 
like to say thankyou to you Nigel for putting up with all you do and 
making this not only avalible to us but also continuing to build and 
improve the product.  Keep it up and I'm sure some time in the future we 
won't be arguing about such a silly topic.


Now let me get back to my Flarm equipped glider so I can relaxe and close 
my eyes.


Chad Nowak


Well don't keep us all in suspense. What was it?

Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


_
Join the millions of Australians using Live Search. Try live.com.au 
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=740&referral=million&URL=http://live.com.au


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Mike Borgelt]

At 05:22 PM 1/02/2007, you wrote:

Mike Wrote:
Well don't keep us all in suspense. What was it?


Which ever glider is not booked at the club (since they are all Flarm equiped)

Chad Nowak


The serious situation, not the glider. How did it occur and and what 
led up to it?


Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Chad Nowak]

To put it simply, it sounds similar to the incident at Benalla.  I had 
someone to my left and behind at about the same altitude.  Even though the 
red light would have been on I don't remember seeing it.  I guess I had my 
eye's outside of the cockpit.  Anyway I looked left to do a 180.  With no 
traffic sighted I started a sharp turn.  Straight away the alarm sounded so 
I immediatly straightened up and saw the red light.  I did a turn to the 
right and then left to find the other glider only to see it behind and 
close.


Was it a close call maybe..maybe not, but I'm glad Flarm stopped the 
situation before I got to find out.


Chad Nowak


From: Mike Borgelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia."
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia."

Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:54:22 +1000

At 05:22 PM 1/02/2007, you wrote:

Mike Wrote:
Well don't keep us all in suspense. What was it?


Which ever glider is not booked at the club (since they are all Flarm 
equiped)


Chad Nowak


The serious situation, not the glider. How did it occur and and what led up 
to it?


Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


_
Advertisement: Fresh jobs daily. Stop waiting for the newspaper. Search Now! 
www.seek.com.au 
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Eseek%2Ecom%2Eau&_t=757263760&_r=Hotmail_EndText_Dec06&_m=EXT


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Mike Borgelt]

At 09:18 PM 1/02/2007, you wrote:
To put it simply, it sounds similar to the incident at Benalla.  I 
had someone to my left and behind at about the same altitude.  Even 
though the red light would have been on I don't remember seeing 
it.  I guess I had my eye's outside of the cockpit.  Anyway I looked 
left to do a 180.  With no traffic sighted I started a sharp 
turn.  Straight away the alarm sounded so I immediatly straightened 
up and saw the red light.  I did a turn to the right and then left 
to find the other glider only to see it behind and close.


Was it a close call maybe..maybe not, but I'm glad Flarm 
stopped the situation before I got to find out.


Chad Nowak


Chad,

Thank you for that. Obviously the other glider was FLARM equipped. 
Did you talk to the pilot later? If so what was his take on the 
situation? Did he think there was  a bad situation at any time?


From your description of your manouevers I'd expect a glider behind 
would have caught up somewhat by the time you completed them.


BTW I asked two pilots with lots of experience flying "in the system" 
and they aren't aware of any TCAS caused accidents.


Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Matthew Gage]

Mike,

TCAS is actually incapable of "causing" an accident. Pilots do that !

However, incorrect use of TCAS can cause an accident.

TCAS requires BOTH pilots to do what TCAS directs for the desired outcome to
be provided. If ONE does something different, then an accident can (AND HAS)
occur.

I'm sure the pilots you asked MUST be aware of the mid air over Germany /
Switzerland in 2002.


Now Flarm is different to TCAS is a very important aspect, and I hope this
never changes. FLARM warns about proximity and collision risk. It does not
DIRECT pilots on what to do.

Doing so could be very dangerous - It would require both pilots to do
exactly as directed, something I really doubt would happen in practice, and
also presumes no other aircraft in in close proximity, again something that
will exists. At mid-air from Benalla this year, there were 3 other gliders
very close.


On 2/2/07 7:57 AM, "Mike Borgelt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> At 09:18 PM 1/02/2007, you wrote:
>> To put it simply, it sounds similar to the incident at Benalla.  I
>> had someone to my left and behind at about the same altitude.  Even
>> though the red light would have been on I don't remember seeing
>> it.  I guess I had my eye's outside of the cockpit.  Anyway I looked
>> left to do a 180.  With no traffic sighted I started a sharp
>> turn.  Straight away the alarm sounded so I immediatly straightened
>> up and saw the red light.  I did a turn to the right and then left
>> to find the other glider only to see it behind and close.
>> 
>> Was it a close call maybe..maybe not, but I'm glad Flarm
>> stopped the situation before I got to find out.
>> 
>> Chad Nowak
> 
> Chad,
> 
> Thank you for that. Obviously the other glider was FLARM equipped.
> Did you talk to the pilot later? If so what was his take on the
> situation? Did he think there was  a bad situation at any time?
> 
>  From your description of your manouevers I'd expect a glider behind
> would have caught up somewhat by the time you completed them.
> 
> BTW I asked two pilots with lots of experience flying "in the system"
> and they aren't aware of any TCAS caused accidents.
> 
> Mike
> Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
> phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
> fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
> cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
>Int'l + 61 429 355784
> email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
> 


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna

[Chad Nowak]

The other pilot involved did not seem as worried as I was but did wonder 
what was going on when I turned in on him.  All that would be needed to make 
that situation dangerous would be if he was practicing lookout in another 
direction.


Chad Nowak



From: Mike Borgelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia."
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in 
Australia."

Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] .Flarm antenna
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 06:57:20 +1000

At 09:18 PM 1/02/2007, you wrote:
To put it simply, it sounds similar to the incident at Benalla.  I had 
someone to my left and behind at about the same altitude.  Even though the 
red light would have been on I don't remember seeing it.  I guess I had my 
eye's outside of the cockpit.  Anyway I looked left to do a 180.  With no 
traffic sighted I started a sharp turn.  Straight away the alarm sounded 
so I immediatly straightened up and saw the red light.  I did a turn to 
the right and then left to find the other glider only to see it behind and 
close.


Was it a close call maybe..maybe not, but I'm glad Flarm stopped 
the situation before I got to find out.


Chad Nowak


Chad,

Thank you for that. Obviously the other glider was FLARM equipped. Did you 
talk to the pilot later? If so what was his take on the situation? Did he 
think there was  a bad situation at any time?


From your description of your manouevers I'd expect a glider behind would 
have caught up somewhat by the time you completed them.


BTW I asked two pilots with lots of experience flying "in the system" and 
they aren't aware of any TCAS caused accidents.


Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


_
Advertisement: Meet Sexy Singles Today @ Lavalife - Click here  
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Flavalife9%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fclickthru%2Fclickthru%2Eact%3Fid%3Dninemsn%26context%3Dan99%26locale%3Den%5FAU%26a%3D23769&_t=754951090&_r=endtext_lavalife_dec_meet&_m=EXT


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

[Geoff Kidd]

Ben/Nigel

Have done as requested but there appears to be nothing specific on the site re 
registration as a Flarm owner, just to register for the shop.

Is that the right place?

Regards


  - Original Message - 
  From: Ben Jones 
  To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net 
  Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:45 AM
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update


  This message is posted on behalf of Nigel



  From: nandrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2008 6:38 AM
  To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
  Subject: -flarm update

   Hi all,

   This week has been quite busy with the visiting flarm people from Flarm 
Technology; they have been flying at Boonah testing the mandatory update due 
late February. Today will be another day of testing. In preparation for the 
release and future notifications could you please register your details on our 
site at www.rf-developments.com using our online registration feature. This 
then gives us a contact database of flarm users so we can automate notification 
and any other changes that need attention.

   

  Please pass on this request to others who may not be on this discussion group.

   

  Thanks

   

  Nigel

   

  o  Nigel Andrews- 

   - PO BOX 120, Boonah, Queensland Australia 4310
  ( INT+(617) 546356704 +(617)54635695 * [EMAIL PROTECTED]

  z http://www.rf-developments.com

   RF Developments Pty Ltd

   "A Queensland Company devoted to Research and Development in aviation 
electronics" 

   



--


  ___
  Aus-soaring mailing list
  Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
  To check or change subscription details, visit:
  http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

[nandrews]

Yes, same registration, it generates an email list from the details entered.

 

Cheers

 

Nigel

 

 

 

*  Nigel Andrews- Managing Director

 

* PO BOX 120, Boonah, Queensland Australia 4310
* INT+(617) 54635670* +(617)54635695 *
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

* http://www.rf-developments.com

 

RF Developments Pty Ltd

 

"A Queensland Company devoted to Research and Development in aviation
electronics" 

 

**DISCLAIMER

 

The information contained in the above e-mail message or messages (which
includes any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. It
is intended only for the use of the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you are not the addressee any form of disclosure, copying,
modification, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on the
information is unauthorised. If you received this communication in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your computer system
network. 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Geoff Kidd
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2008 9:22 AM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

 

Ben/Nigel

 

Have done as requested but there appears to be nothing specific on the site
re registration as a Flarm owner, just to register for the shop.

 

Is that the right place?

 

Regards

 

 

- Original Message - 

From: Ben Jones <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  

To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net 

Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 9:45 AM

Subject: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

 

This message is posted on behalf of Nigel

 

From: nandrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2008 6:38 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: -flarm update

Hi all,

This week has been quite busy with the visiting flarm people from Flarm
Technology; they have been flying at Boonah testing the mandatory update due
late February. Today will be another day of testing. In preparation for the
release and future notifications could you please register your details on
our site at www.rf-developments.com using our online registration feature.
This then gives us a contact database of flarm users so we can automate
notification and any other changes that need attention.

 

Please pass on this request to others who may not be on this discussion
group.

 

Thanks

 

Nigel

 

*  Nigel Andrews- 

 * PO BOX 120, Boonah, Queensland Australia 4310
* INT+(617) 54635670* +(617)54635695 * [EMAIL PROTECTED]

* http://www.rf-developments.com

 RF Developments Pty Ltd

 "A Queensland Company devoted to Research and Development in aviation
electronics" 

 


  _  


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] -Flarm update

[Robert Moore]

Nigel, when may your FLARM's become IGC approved for minor flights.

At 07:05 AM 19/08/2008, you wrote:

Hi all,

Version 4.04 is now available from the flarm 
website. Please check the update notes to see if 
you need to update, I recommend doing these 
updates anyway. Make sure you check that the 
area is manually set to Australia 921 instead of auto.


Cheers

Nigel




o  Nigel Andrews– Managing Director

- PO BOX 120, Boonah, Queensland Australia 4310
( INT+(617) 546356704 +(617)54635695 * 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

z http://www.rf-developments.com
 Skype - rv7pilot

RF Developments Pty Ltd

"A Queensland Company devoted to Research and 
Development in aviation electronics"


**DISCLAIMER

The information contained in the above e-mail 
message or messages (which includes any 
attachments) is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. It is intended only for the use of 
the person or entity to which it is addressed. 
If you are not the addressee any form of 
disclosure, copying, modification, distribution 
or any action taken or omitted in reliance on 
the information is unauthorised. If you received 
this communication in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and delete it from your computer system network.

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring




Regards

Rob Moore
08 82588026 home
0412 055 888 mobile


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Mike Borgelt]

At 05:54 PM 14/03/2015, you wrote:

FYI:
FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.
It's available here:Â 
http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/


The protocols in the current version (v5) and 
new version (v6) are supposedly totally 
incompatible, so please update your FLARMs 
before next flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.


 I think it's very 
irresponsible of FLARM to publish a backwards 
incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am 
not flying in the Alps this weekend. 



I gather it is to prevent competitors from 
producing compatible hardware without paying royalties to Flarm.


Mike


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Tim Shirley]

Hi all,

Flarms are standalone devices.  They won't stop working tomorrow, 
because there is nothing to stop them working.  A Flarm on V5 will see a 
Flarm on V5 just the same for ever, so it is probably better for the 
upgrade at a club, or in an area where gliders often fly together, to be 
co-ordinated.  Making an instant change to your own Flarm might simply 
disable yours :)


Flarm is being 100% consistent in its policy, and if that is 
irresponsible well then more irresponsibility from Tony Abbott would be 
good (if that is possible).  They have NEVER guaranteed that a major 
version upgrade is backward compatible, in fact they have always said 
that any backward compatibility between major versions is coincidental.  
I make no comment on the reasons or the necessity for this policy.


There's nothing wrong with a Flarm, except for the far too high 
expectations we have of it.


Just look out the window - no version changes required but make sure 
your specs are up to spec.


Cheers

/Tim Shirley/

/tra dire é fare c' é mezzo il mare/

On 14/03/2015 6:54 PM, Matthew Scutter wrote:

FYI:
FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.
It's available here: http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/

The protocols in the current version (v5) and new version (v6) are 
supposedly totally incompatible, so please update your FLARMs before 
next flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.


 I think it's very irresponsible of FLARM to publish 
a backwards incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am not flying 
in the Alps this weekend. 



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Matthew Scutter]

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Tim Shirley 
wrote:
>
> Flarms are standalone devices.  They won't stop working tomorrow, because
> there is nothing to stop them working.
>
No, but they will stop working on March 31st, if you're still running v5.
And every subsequent year on subsequent versions.


> A Flarm on V5 will see a Flarm on V5 just the same for ever, so it is
> probably better for the upgrade at a club, or in an area where gliders
> often fly together, to be co-ordinated.  Making an instant change to your
> own Flarm might simply disable yours :)
>
Right, and the only rational time to upgrade is immediately - you don't
know who's already upgraded around you. I see gliders from other clubs,
sometimes other states almost every weekend.


> Flarm is being 100% consistent in its policy, and if that is irresponsible
> well then more irresponsibility from Tony Abbott would be good (if that is
> possible).  They have NEVER guaranteed that a major version upgrade is
> backward compatible, in fact they have always said that any backward
> compatibility between major versions is coincidental.  I make no comment on
> the reasons or the necessity for this policy.
>
> I do not understand what you mean by 100% consistent in it's policy. Which
policy?
Maybe they have some enormous safety improvements in the new firmware that
justifies the suboptimal functionality for the next fortnight. If so I
don't think it's been adequately justified to us, the users.

There's nothing wrong with a Flarm, except for the far too high
> expectations we have of it.
>
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a premium priced piece of
technology explicitly designed to prevent collisions to be potentially
unable to do so for weeks of the year.

Just look out the window - no version changes required but make sure your
> specs are up to spec.
>
Fortunately I can still walk when my car is broken too.
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Gary Stevenson]

Hi Tim,

In the main,  I enjoy your posts, and often have a quite laugh . Like
the bit about the specs. Unfortunately, with the average age of the Oz
glider pilot being what it is, this is very sound advice, but a good laugh
nevertheless. [BTW my new lenses are just one week old.]

As the sign on the dunny door says; LOOKOUT, LOOKOUT, LOOKOUT.

I agree with you re a club based co-ordinated change. Thanks to Brian Wood
most of the flarms in Grampians Soaring Club fleet, including those in
private gliders were updated today, and two currently absent ships will be
done tomorrow. 

Cheers,

Gary

 

From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley
Sent: Saturday, 14 March 2015 8:32 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

 

Hi all,

Flarms are standalone devices.  They won't stop working tomorrow, because
there is nothing to stop them working.  A Flarm on V5 will see a Flarm on V5
just the same for ever, so it is probably better for the upgrade at a club,
or in an area where gliders often fly together, to be co-ordinated.  Making
an instant change to your own Flarm might simply disable yours :)

Flarm is being 100% consistent in its policy, and if that is irresponsible
well then more irresponsibility from Tony Abbott would be good (if that is
possible).  They have NEVER guaranteed that a major version upgrade is
backward compatible, in fact they have always said that any backward
compatibility between major versions is coincidental.  I make no comment on
the reasons or the necessity for this policy. 

There's nothing wrong with a Flarm, except for the far too high expectations
we have of it.  

Just look out the window - no version changes required but make sure your
specs are up to spec.

Cheers

Tim Shirley

tra dire é fare c' é mezzo il mare

On 14/03/2015 6:54 PM, Matthew Scutter wrote:

FYI: 

FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.

It's available here: http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/

 

The protocols in the current version (v5) and new version (v6) are
supposedly totally incompatible, so please update your FLARMs before next
flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.

 

 I think it's very irresponsible of FLARM to publish a
backwards incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am not flying in the
Alps this weekend. 






___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

 

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Gary Stevenson]

Mike,

You are probable right on the mark here.

However, in this instance, I have no argument with their approach.

The record shows that this device has saved lives (just as parachutes have
saved lives). Do we begrudge Parachute Manufacturers’ making an honest
living from their enterprise? 

Limiting entry of competition, where possible, has always been a valid
business principle.

I am almost certain that the guys from (FLARM, Switzerland), monitor this
forum. Perhaps they might like to make comment?

Gary 

 

From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Mike
Borgelt
Sent: Saturday, 14 March 2015 7:41 PM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

 

At 05:54 PM 14/03/2015, you wrote:



FYI:
FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.
It's available here:Â http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/

The protocols in the current version (v5) and new version (v6) are
supposedly totally incompatible, so please update your FLARMs before next
flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.

 I think it's very irresponsible of FLARM to publish a
backwards incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am not flying in the
Alps this weekend. 



I gather it is to prevent competitors from producing compatible hardware
without paying royalties to Flarm.

Mike



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[terrycubley]

There was much discussion at the IGC meeting about proposed changes to flarm. 

There is a growing discussion about the use of flarm in competitions. Its use 
in safety improvement – alerting pilots of potential conflict, appears to be at 
odds with its use as a tactical tool.

Pilots now have the capacity to obtain data from the flarm signal to identify 
which glider is visible, its height and rate of climb. This causes two 
problems: Firstly, pilots are spending a lot of time staring at their flarm 
screen which reduces time looking out of the window.  Secondly, pilots are 
turning off their flarm so that other pilots cannot see what they are doing, so 
the safety benefit is removed.

The other issue is the increased use of tracking receivers which takes flarm 
data and then uploads this onto a web display. This is providing real time data 
on tracks and location of the various gliders, and many pilots are now turning 
off their flarm to protect their data.

Flarm manufacturers are rolling out a new software version which attempts to 
provide a solution to these issues. The stealth mode is being improved to 
provide better safety features, and to introduce a No tracking setting which 
ensures tracking is only available via official flarm receivers/transmitters.

Terry

 Gary Stevenson  wrote: 
> Mike,
> 
> You are probable right on the mark here.
> 
> However, in this instance, I have no argument with their approach.
> 
> The record shows that this device has saved lives (just as parachutes have
> saved lives). Do we begrudge Parachute Manufacturers’ making an honest
> living from their enterprise? 
> 
> Limiting entry of competition, where possible, has always been a valid
> business principle.
> 
> I am almost certain that the guys from (FLARM, Switzerland), monitor this
> forum. Perhaps they might like to make comment?
> 
> Gary 
> 
>  
> 
> From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
> [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Mike
> Borgelt
> Sent: Saturday, 14 March 2015 7:41 PM
> To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update
> 
>  
> 
> At 05:54 PM 14/03/2015, you wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> FYI:
> FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.
> It's available here:Â http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/
> 
> The protocols in the current version (v5) and new version (v6) are
> supposedly totally incompatible, so please update your FLARMs before next
> flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.
> 
>  I think it's very irresponsible of FLARM to publish a
> backwards incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am not flying in the
> Alps this weekend. 
> 
> 
> 
> I gather it is to prevent competitors from producing compatible hardware
> without paying royalties to Flarm.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Luke O'Donnell]

Something that may not have been considered, is that Stealth mode for
flarms isn't 100% bulletproof. My understanding is that stealth mode is
basically a flag in the RF protocol that tells other flarms that it wants
to be treated as a stealth mode aircraft. This then relies on the receiving
flarm to implement the stealth mode rules, when transmitting the data to
the serial port. All the data required for full tracking is still
transmitted by the flarm radio.

A few seconds on Google shows that someone managed to reverse engineer an
earlier version of the RF protocol (which probably hasn't changed much
since) a while back.

The nature of the RF protocol being simplex, means that any encryption they
implement will need pre-shared keys. This means every flarm has the keys
(password) pre-installed. The firmware updates would contain them if they
changed them.

The upshot is that if someone wanted to spend the time and effort, they
could reverse engineer the RF protocol, build a custom flarm receiver unit,
and get full tracking capabilities no matter how the flarms are configured.
There really isn't much the Flarm guys can do to prevent it.

Something to consider including if the rules are changed.

Luke

On 14 March 2015 at 21:12,  wrote:

> There was much discussion at the IGC meeting about proposed changes to
> flarm.
>
> There is a growing discussion about the use of flarm in competitions. Its
> use in safety improvement – alerting pilots of potential conflict, appears
> to be at odds with its use as a tactical tool.
>
> Pilots now have the capacity to obtain data from the flarm signal to
> identify which glider is visible, its height and rate of climb. This causes
> two problems: Firstly, pilots are spending a lot of time staring at their
> flarm screen which reduces time looking out of the window.  Secondly,
> pilots are turning off their flarm so that other pilots cannot see what
> they are doing, so the safety benefit is removed.
>
> The other issue is the increased use of tracking receivers which takes
> flarm data and then uploads this onto a web display. This is providing real
> time data on tracks and location of the various gliders, and many pilots
> are now turning off their flarm to protect their data.
>
> Flarm manufacturers are rolling out a new software version which attempts
> to provide a solution to these issues. The stealth mode is being improved
> to provide better safety features, and to introduce a No tracking setting
> which ensures tracking is only available via official flarm
> receivers/transmitters.
>
> Terry
>
>  Gary Stevenson  wrote:
> > Mike,
> >
> > You are probable right on the mark here.
> >
> > However, in this instance, I have no argument with their approach.
> >
> > The record shows that this device has saved lives (just as parachutes
> have
> > saved lives). Do we begrudge Parachute Manufacturers’ making an honest
> > living from their enterprise?
> >
> > Limiting entry of competition, where possible, has always been a valid
> > business principle.
> >
> > I am almost certain that the guys from (FLARM, Switzerland), monitor this
> > forum. Perhaps they might like to make comment?
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >
> > From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
> > [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Mike
> > Borgelt
> > Sent: Saturday, 14 March 2015 7:41 PM
> > To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
> > Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update
> >
> >
> >
> > At 05:54 PM 14/03/2015, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > FYI:
> > FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.
> > It's available here:Â http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/
> >
> > The protocols in the current version (v5) and new version (v6) are
> > supposedly totally incompatible, so please update your FLARMs before next
> > flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.
> >
> >  I think it's very irresponsible of FLARM to publish a
> > backwards incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am not flying in
> the
> > Alps this weekend. 
> >
> >
> >
> > I gather it is to prevent competitors from producing compatible hardware
> > without paying royalties to Flarm.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ___
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Glenn McLean]

Hi Tim,
As you have reminded many in the past, - this is a Gliding Forum. Keep 
the politics and political comments out of it.

Glenn


On 14/03/2015 8:32 PM, Tim Shirley wrote:

Hi all,

Flarms are standalone devices.  They won't stop working tomorrow, 
because there is nothing to stop them working.  A Flarm on V5 will see 
a Flarm on V5 just the same for ever, so it is probably better for the 
upgrade at a club, or in an area where gliders often fly together, to 
be co-ordinated.  Making an instant change to your own Flarm might 
simply disable yours :)


Flarm is being 100% consistent in its policy, and if that is 
irresponsible well then more irresponsibility from Tony Abbott would 
be good (if that is possible).  They have NEVER guaranteed that a 
major version upgrade is backward compatible, in fact they have always 
said that any backward compatibility between major versions is 
coincidental.  I make no comment on the reasons or the necessity for 
this policy.


There's nothing wrong with a Flarm, except for the far too high 
expectations we have of it.


Just look out the window - no version changes required but make sure 
your specs are up to spec.


Cheers

/Tim Shirley/

/tra dire é fare c' é mezzo il mare/

On 14/03/2015 6:54 PM, Matthew Scutter wrote:

FYI:
FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.
It's available here: http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/

The protocols in the current version (v5) and new version (v6) are 
supposedly totally incompatible, so please update your FLARMs before 
next flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.


 I think it's very irresponsible of FLARM to publish 
a backwards incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am not flying 
in the Alps this weekend. 



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring




___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Mike Borgelt]

As a standalone device a Flarm is merely an expensive GPS data source.

Flarm is a *system* and requires other devices 
and compatibility between devices to function. 
The usefulness also degrades rapidly as the 
proportion of potential targets either is not 
equipped or the unit isn't working or is non compatible.


Analogies with parachutes aren't useful. There 
are many parachute manufacturers and I'm not 
aware that licence fees are being paid by the 
others to one manufacturer  and while there may 
be airworthiness directives from time to time on a particular brand or type of


parachute there aren't potential fleet wide problems every year.

Not a problem until use is mandated  as in contests or some clubs.

The serious parts of aviation seem to go to lots 
of trouble to maintain backwards compatibility. 
i.e. continuing use of pressure altitude instead 
of GPS altitude, Mode A transponders are 
compatible with Mode C and mode S and ADSB co-exists with these on the same


frequencies. Except in the USA where the 
potential congestion means they have gone to 
978Mhz for ADSB for small aircraft and maintained 
the Extended squitter transponder 1090 Mhz use 
for large aircraft. That means ground stations 
and being in range of one for the two


sets of users to know about each other. Wonderful!

TCAS as used in airliners also has the feature 
that the system logic is known to the users and users are trained in it.


A couple of years ago I analysed a mid air 
between two gliders in Austria. Both Flarm 
equipped and both Flarms were working. The pilots 
frantically scanned and still failed to see each 
other whereupon one turned left  - right across 
the other glider's flightpath and the


collision occurred. Otherwise they'd have missed. 
Fortunately both managed to land safely.


Mike





At 10:56 AM 16/03/2015, you wrote:

Hi Tim,
As you have reminded many in the past, - this is 
a Gliding Forum. Keep the politics and political comments out of it.

Glenn


On 14/03/2015 8:32 PM, Tim Shirley wrote:

Hi all,

Flarms are standalone devices.  They won't stop 
working tomorrow, because there is nothing to 
stop them working.  A Flarm on V5 will see a 
Flarm on V5 just the same for ever, so it is 
probably better for the upgrade at a club, or 
in an area where gliders often fly together, to 
be co-ordinated.  Making an instant change to 
your own Flarm might simply disable yours :)


Flarm is being 100% consistent in its policy, 
and if that is irresponsible well then more 
irresponsibility from Tony Abbott would be good 
(if that is possible).  They have NEVER 
guaranteed that a major version upgrade is 
backward compatible, in fact they have always 
said that any backward compatibility between 
major versions is coincidental.  I make no 
comment on the reasons or the necessity for this policy.


There's nothing wrong with a Flarm, except for 
the far too high expectations we have of it.


Just look out the window - no version changes 
required but make sure your specs are up to spec.


Cheers

Tim Shirley

tra dire é fare c' é mezzo il mare
On 14/03/2015 6:54 PM, Matthew Scutter wrote:

FYI:
FLARM has now published it's latest update - v6.
It's available here: 
http://flarm.com/support/firmware-updates/


The protocols in the current version (v5) and 
new version (v6) are supposedly totally 
incompatible, so please update your FLARMs 
before next flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.


 I think it's very 
irresponsible of FLARM to publish a backwards 
incompatible upgrade like this. I am glad I am 
not flying in the Alps this weekend. 




___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring





___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring


Borgelt Instruments - design & manufacture of 
quality soaring instrumentation since 1978

www.borgeltinstruments.com
tel:   07 4635 5784 overseas: int+61-7-4635 5784
mob: 042835 5784:  int+61-42835 5784
P O Box 4607, Toowoomba East, QLD 4350, Australia  ___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.n

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

[Laurie Simpkins]

Hi,
 Just attempted to updated my Swiss Flarm this weekend and turned it into an 
expensive paperweight.  Fortunately two well known members of WGC ( thanks 
again) pooled their combined knowledge and many hours later it became a semi 
useful part of the airframe again. Was about to scrap all electronics and 
install my cosim vario and make my own beeping noises???
It will be a sad day IMHO when we mandate any form of electronic device for all 
gliders as standard equipment. I appreciate their use for gliders and tugs ( I 
used to tow ) in comps etc but as the owner of some vintage gliders ( including 
my open cirrus) i challenge their relevance in all parts of our sport.  
I still believe we could help ourselves more by  encouraging more anti 
collision marking ( read all the arguments) and keeping our heads out of the 
cockpit where they belong. 
Before you crucify me ( as happens occasionally here) please justify your 
comments with why you think i need a Flarm or equivalent in a vintage or 
training aircraft mostly operating in the CTAF. Soon we will be asked these 
questions as a body and i hope we answer wisely.
I say again i support and understand the relevance in a comp situation for 
devices likes Flarms however we  will need to make future decisions and rules 
for all the gliding community.
Currently i probably couldn't operate at some local clubs due to an insistence 
an Flarms for all aircraft???
 
cheers
Laurie
 
GMO,GDW,GEF,GHJ,GTG 
 

 
> From: aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
> Subject: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 138, Issue 25
> To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:22:52 +1030
> 
> Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
>   aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   aus-soaring-ow...@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>1. Re: FLARM update (Mike Borgelt)
>2. Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Erich Wittstock)
>3. Re: Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Ian Downes)
> 
> 
> ------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:47:29 +1000
> From: Mike Borgelt 
> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update
> To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
>   
> Message-ID: <77bbc2$v9j...@ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
> 
> As a standalone device a Flarm is merely an expensive GPS data source.
> 
> Flarm is a *system* and requires other devices 
> and compatibility between devices to function. 
> The usefulness also degrades rapidly as the 
> proportion of potential targets either is not 
> equipped or the unit isn't working or is non compatible.
> 
> Analogies with parachutes aren't useful. There 
> are many parachute manufacturers and I'm not 
> aware that licence fees are being paid by the 
> others to one manufacturer  and while there may 
> be airworthiness directives from time to time on a particular brand or type of
> 
> parachute there aren't potential fleet wide problems every year.
> 
> Not a problem until use is mandated  as in contests or some clubs.
> 
> The serious parts of aviation seem to go to lots 
> of trouble to maintain backwards compatibility. 
> i.e. continuing use of pressure altitude instead 
> of GPS altitude, Mode A transponders are 
> compatible with Mode C and mode S and ADSB co-exists with these on the same
> 
> frequencies. Except in the USA where the 
> potential congestion means they have gone to 
> 978Mhz for ADSB for small aircraft and maintained 
> the Extended squitter transponder 1090 Mhz use 
> for large aircraft. That means ground stations 
> and being in range of one for the two
> 
> sets of users to know about each other. Wonderful!
> 
> TCAS as used in airliners also has the feature 
> that the system logic is known to the users and users are trained in it.
> 
> A couple of years ago I analysed a mid air 
> between two gliders in Austria. Both Flarm 
> equipped and both Flarms were working. The pilots 
> frantically scanned and still failed to see each 
> other whereupon one turned left  - right across 
> the other glider's flightpath and the
> 
> collision occurred. Otherwise they'd have missed. 
>

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

[Chris Runeckles]

Hi Laurie

So  before I make the same error with my Swiss flarm, what was the problem?
and could you share the fix with the forum please

Many thanks

Chris Runeckles
GCWA

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Laurie Simpkins 
wrote:

> Hi,
>  Just attempted to updated my Swiss Flarm this weekend and turned it into
> an expensive paperweight.  Fortunately two well known members of WGC (
> thanks again) pooled their combined knowledge and many hours later it
> became a semi useful part of the airframe again. Was about to scrap all
> electronics and install my cosim vario and make my own beeping noises???
> It will be a sad day IMHO when we mandate any form of electronic device
> for all gliders as standard equipment. I appreciate their use for gliders
> and tugs ( I used to tow ) in comps etc but as the owner of some vintage
> gliders ( including my open cirrus) i challenge their relevance in all
> parts of our sport.
> I still believe we could help ourselves more by  encouraging more anti
> collision marking ( read all the arguments) and keeping our heads out of
> the cockpit where they belong.
> Before you crucify me ( as happens occasionally here) please justify your
> comments with why you think i need a Flarm or equivalent in a vintage or
> training aircraft mostly operating in the CTAF. Soon we will be asked these
> questions as a body and i hope we answer wisely.
> I say again i support and understand the relevance in a comp situation for
> devices likes Flarms however we  will need to make future decisions and
> rules for all the gliding community.
> Currently i probably couldn't operate at some local clubs due to an
> insistence an Flarms for all aircraft???
>
> cheers
> Laurie
>
> GMO,GDW,GEF,GHJ,GTG
>
>
>
> > From: aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
> > Subject: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 138, Issue 25
> > To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> > Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:22:52 +1030
> >
> > Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
> > aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > aus-soaring-ow...@lists.internode.on.net
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Re: FLARM update (Mike Borgelt)
> > 2. Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Erich Wittstock)
> > 3. Re: Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Ian Downes)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:47:29 +1000
> > From: Mike Borgelt 
> > Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update
> > To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
> > 
> > Message-ID: <77bbc2$v9j...@ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
> >
> > As a standalone device a Flarm is merely an expensive GPS data source.
> >
> > Flarm is a *system* and requires other devices
> > and compatibility between devices to function.
> > The usefulness also degrades rapidly as the
> > proportion of potential targets either is not
> > equipped or the unit isn't working or is non compatible.
> >
> > Analogies with parachutes aren't useful. There
> > are many parachute manufacturers and I'm not
> > aware that licence fees are being paid by the
> > others to one manufacturer and while there may
> > be airworthiness directives from time to time on a particular brand or
> type of
> >
> > parachute there aren't potential fleet wide problems every year.
> >
> > Not a problem until use is mandated as in contests or some clubs.
> >
> > The serious parts of aviation seem to go to lots
> > of trouble to maintain backwards compatibility.
> > i.e. continuing use of pressure altitude instead
> > of GPS altitude, Mode A transponders are
> > compatible with Mode C and mode S and ADSB co-exists with these on the
> same
> >
> > frequencies. Except in the USA where the
> > potential congestion means they have gone to
> > 978Mhz for ADSB for small aircraft and maintained
> > the Extended squitter transponder 1090 Mhz use
> > for large aircraft. That means ground stations

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

[Ron]

Just wondering where this matter stands under consumer law? These units are not 
very old. I find the idea that i am forced to buy something from a company that 
has no regard for its early customers  totally offensive. You certainly  would  
not normally do business with them.

 

> On 17 Mar 2015, at 00:08, Chris Runeckles  wrote:
> 
> Hi Laurie
> 
> So  before I make the same error with my Swiss flarm, what was the problem? 
> and could you share the fix with the forum please
> 
> Many thanks
> 
> Chris Runeckles
> GCWA
> 
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Laurie Simpkins  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>  Just attempted to updated my Swiss Flarm this weekend and turned it into an 
>> expensive paperweight.  Fortunately two well known members of WGC ( thanks 
>> again) pooled their combined knowledge and many hours later it became a semi 
>> useful part of the airframe again. Was about to scrap all electronics and 
>> install my cosim vario and make my own beeping noises???
>> It will be a sad day IMHO when we mandate any form of electronic device for 
>> all gliders as standard equipment. I appreciate their use for gliders and 
>> tugs ( I used to tow ) in comps etc but as the owner of some vintage gliders 
>> ( including my open cirrus) i challenge their relevance in all parts of our 
>> sport.  
>> I still believe we could help ourselves more by  encouraging more anti 
>> collision marking ( read all the arguments) and keeping our heads out of the 
>> cockpit where they belong. 
>> Before you crucify me ( as happens occasionally here) please justify your 
>> comments with why you think i need a Flarm or equivalent in a vintage or 
>> training aircraft mostly operating in the CTAF. Soon we will be asked these 
>> questions as a body and i hope we answer wisely.
>> I say again i support and understand the relevance in a comp situation for 
>> devices likes Flarms however we  will need to make future decisions and 
>> rules for all the gliding community.
>> Currently i probably couldn't operate at some local clubs due to an 
>> insistence an Flarms for all aircraft???
>>  
>> cheers
>> Laurie
>>  
>> GMO,GDW,GEF,GHJ,GTG 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> > From: aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
>> > Subject: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 138, Issue 25
>> > To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
>> > Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:22:52 +1030
>> > 
>> > Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
>> > aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
>> > 
>> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> > aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
>> > 
>> > You can reach the person managing the list at
>> > aus-soaring-ow...@lists.internode.on.net
>> > 
>> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> > than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Today's Topics:
>> > 
>> > 1. Re: FLARM update (Mike Borgelt)
>> > 2. Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Erich Wittstock)
>> > 3. Re: Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Ian Downes)
>> > 
>> > 
>> > --
>> > 
>> > Message: 1
>> > Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:47:29 +1000
>> > From: Mike Borgelt 
>> > Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update
>> > To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
>> > 
>> > Message-ID: <77bbc2$v9j...@ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>> > 
>> > As a standalone device a Flarm is merely an expensive GPS data source.
>> > 
>> > Flarm is a *system* and requires other devices 
>> > and compatibility between devices to function. 
>> > The usefulness also degrades rapidly as the 
>> > proportion of potential targets either is not 
>> > equipped or the unit isn't working or is non compatible.
>> > 
>> > Analogies with parachutes aren't useful. There 
>> > are many parachute manufacturers and I'm not 
>> > aware that licence fees are being paid by the 
>> > others to one manufacturer and while there may 
>> > be airworthiness directives from time to time on a particular brand or 
>> > type of
>>

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update

[Laurie Hoffman]

Hi All,Just to add to Laurie Simpkin's post
We have operated a Dimona motor glider out of Camden for the last 14 years and 
have not adopted use of FLARM for totally different operational reasons to that 
of Laurie's.Camden for those that don't know it is a Class D control zone on 
Sydney's SW outskirts with three gliding clubs and dozens of private operators 
as well as significant GA, prop and jet warbirds, rotary wing training and 
aerial bush fire fighting in season.Almost all of our flights are touring 
flights carried out under a combination of power and glide and often with 
soaring. A large portion (80-90%) of each flight is carried out between 
30-100km from Camden and over the rugged Blue Mts, or over the coast, where 
very little gliding takes place.Under these very low gliding density conditions 
we determined that the head in cockpit disadvantage of FLARM doesn't outweigh 
any advantage, for OUR situation.There are numerous other strategies, 
especially for touring motor gliders, that can make both lookout and your own 
visibility much more effective.Laurie Hoffman

  From: Laurie Simpkins 
 To: "aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net"  
 Sent: Monday, 16 March 2015, 23:34
 Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Update
   
Hi,
 Just attempted to updated my Swiss Flarm this weekend and turned it into an 
expensive paperweight.  Fortunately two well known members of WGC ( thanks 
again) pooled their combined knowledge and many hours later it became a semi 
useful part of the airframe again. Was about to scrap all electronics and 
install my cosim vario and make my own beeping noises???
It will be a sad day IMHO when we mandate any form of electronic device for all 
gliders as standard equipment. I appreciate their use for gliders and tugs ( I 
used to tow ) in comps etc but as the owner of some vintage gliders ( including 
my open cirrus) i challenge their relevance in all parts of our sport.  
I still believe we could help ourselves more by  encouraging more anti 
collision marking ( read all the arguments) and keeping our heads out of the 
cockpit where they belong. 
Before you crucify me ( as happens occasionally here) please justify your 
comments with why you think i need a Flarm or equivalent in a vintage or 
training aircraft mostly operating in the CTAF. Soon we will be asked these 
questions as a body and i hope we answer wisely.
I say again i support and understand the relevance in a comp situation for 
devices likes Flarms however we  will need to make future decisions and rules 
for all the gliding community.
Currently i probably couldn't operate at some local clubs due to an insistence 
an Flarms for all aircraft???
 
cheers
Laurie
 
GMO,GDW,GEF,GHJ,GTG 
 

 
> From: aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
> Subject: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 138, Issue 25
> To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:22:52 +1030
> 
> Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
> aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> aus-soaring-ow...@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. Re: FLARM update (Mike Borgelt)
> 2. Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Erich Wittstock)
> 3. Re: Easter Comp 2015 cancelled (Ian Downes)
> 
> 
> ------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:47:29 +1000
> From: Mike Borgelt 
> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update
> To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
> 
> Message-ID: <77bbc2$v9j...@ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
> 
> As a standalone device a Flarm is merely an expensive GPS data source.
> 
> Flarm is a *system* and requires other devices 
> and compatibility between devices to function. 
> The usefulness also degrades rapidly as the 
> proportion of potential targets either is not 
> equipped or the unit isn't working or is non compatible.
> 
> Analogies with parachutes aren't useful. There 
> are many parachute manufacturers and I'm not 
> aware that licence fees are being paid by the 
> others to one manufacturer and while there may 
> be airworthiness directives from time to time on a particular brand or type of
> 
> parachute there aren't potential fleet wide problems every year.
> 
> Not a problem u

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Install

[Derek Ruddock]

Hopefully NOT a target  :)

-Original Message-
From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Richard
Frawley
Sent: Tuesday, 17 March 2015 10:51 AM
To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Flarm Install


Yes, i agree with Erich that correct Flarm Antenna installation is critical.
Over the last 2 years since taking an interest in this  particular aspect, I
have observed some horrible installs with the antennas stuck to the sides of
radios or Varios,  planar antennas (paddle pop) pointing the wrong way,
antenna buried in loom wiring, crushed cabling etc etc. Remember to also
have the GPS antenna mounted with a clear and unobstructed view of the sky.
I even saw one of those mounted upside down and another vertically mounted.

If you think your aerial is poorly placed, then please, ask around and get
someone in your club who knows about these things to help you position it
correctly, it might be your life that is saved.

I also agree that there is no substitute for head up and out which is why i
have voice annunciation. My flarm display is also smack in the center and
right at the top of the panel so i have minimum target acquisition time when
needed.

Regards

Richard




> On 17 Mar 2015, at 10:22 am, aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
wrote:
> 
> Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
>aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>aus-soaring-requ...@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>aus-soaring-ow...@lists.internode.on.net
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific 
> than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Bolts (Graham Holland)
>   2. Re: Flarm support non existant (Ian Mc Phee)
>   3. Re: Swiss Flarm fix (Erich Wittstock)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:28:36 +1100
> From: Graham Holland 
> Subject: [Aus-soaring] Bolts
> To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
> Message-ID: 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> 
> A recent posting revealed some difficulty in sourcing bolts for gliders. I
didn?t think they were that arcane. Basic Sailplane Engineering (BSE) says
that ?All German and some other European gliders use bolts that have been
manufactured to a DIN specification.? (p.1.5.1) and that the most common
bolt meets DIN 931. So how easy is it to buy such a bolt?
> 
> Din 931 has been superseded by ISO 4014-2011, Hexagon head bolts-product
grade A and B. This is identical to AS 1110.1-2000, ISO metric hexagon
headed bolts and screws - product grade A and B ? bolts. Many Australian
fastener suppliers such as Coventry Fasteners (aka Konnect), Tower Fasteners
and James Glen supply high tensile steel bolts to AS 1110.1. Stainless steel
bolts to DIN 931 are also available. So it seems to be more a matter of
bolts for aircraft rather than aircraft bolts.
> 
> I would expect glider manufacturers to specify bolts, but I could not find
any reference to a bolt specification in the maintenance manual for the Duo
Discus and PW5 (they were to hand). Where would it be?
> 
> Graham
> 
> Graham Holland
> 27 Johnston Crescent
> Lane Cove NSW 2066
> Australia
> 02 9427 3282
> grahamholl...@iinet.net.au
> 
> -- next part -- An HTML attachment was 
> scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments
> /20150317/6b3b6b6a/attachment.html>
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 10:00:40 +1100
> From: Ian Mc Phee 
> Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm support non existant
> To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
>
> Message-ID:
>
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> That is not good re "classic" flarm units.
> 
> I do know in Germany and Austria companies are obliged to provide 10 
> years after sales service after production ceases.  Look at 
> Glassflugel if you wanted a spring for a Std Libelle it would be in 
> the post today and you will receive next week. Hanko and Christian 
> still provide outstanding service.  I would have thought the Swiss 
> would have similar rules.  G Winter & Co (Achim Winter) will service a 
> 50 year old vario and maybe it will cost Eur120 but it will be just as 
> good as new.  The future may be an issue only because there are not 
> 

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM update

[Al Borowski]

On 14/03/2015, Matthew Scutter  wrote:
> The protocols in the current version (v5) and new version (v6) are
> supposedly totally incompatible, so please update your FLARMs before next
> flight or you won't be able to see pilots with the other version.

I could have sworn, back when FLARM was being promoted, the designers
were claiming the protocol would be freely available to other
manufacturers in the interest of safety.

Making a battery powered box that combines a GPS, radio, and collision
sensing algorithms is not beyond a competent engineer. I did something
very similar as a final year university project - not as refined,
obviously, but functional.

The barrier to entry should be quite low as there is (to my knowledge)
no special flight certification and the radio bands used are
license-free / not aviation specific. If the protocol were open,
competition would almost certainly drive the cost of collision
avoidance devices down.

A closed protocol is healthy for FLARM. For the wider gliding
community? I like competition.

Cheers,

Al
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

[Paul Mander]

Had a similar difficulty. Hold the little switch up instead of button.

 

  _  

From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Pam
Kurstjens
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2011 10:57 AM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

 

We have updated our old type OzFlarm to 5.03 and it does not work anymore.
When flying, it has two red lights on all the time Tx-Rx and GPS).

When I try to open it in Flarm Tool, it does not work, the only option
available is 'recover'. When I try this, a page opens where it says
something like 'hold button down until update begins'. What button is this?

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Pam

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

[Derek Ruddock]

Pam,

Apparently some of the early Flarms failed when updated, and need to be
returned to the manufacturer for modification. 

This happened to one of ours.

 

From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Pam
Kurstjens
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2011 10:57 AM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

 

We have updated our old type OzFlarm to 5.03 and it does not work anymore.
When flying, it has two red lights on all the time Tx-Rx and GPS).

When I try to open it in Flarm Tool, it does not work, the only option
available is 'recover'. When I try this, a page opens where it says
something like 'hold button down until update begins'. What button is this?

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Pam

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.449 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3609 - Release Date: 05/01/11
18:34:00

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

[Lee B]

Pam,
 
Providing your OzFlarm serial number is greater than 200  (obtained when 
connected to flarmtool OR the last 3 digits on label on base of OzFlarm), you 
can 'recover' by holding the little switch up AS YOU CONNECT THE POWER.
 
If the serial number is below 200 it is likely the recover function is not 
implemented. You would then have to send it to SwiftAvionics 07 3879 4005. (Not 
expensive and they do a quick turnaround).
It is possible that loading a later release (i.e. when 5.04 is released) will 
work as automatic updating to later version doesn't require the 'recover' 
function. I have seen this work several times.
 
I have had several OzFlarms sent to SwiftAvionics and they always do a hardware 
RX and TX sensitivity check which is really worthwhile.
 
Once you've got the Ozflarm going again, the Flarm website provides a 
'range-analysis' IGC file check that is very good for testing aerial problems.
 
Lee Braithwaite

 

 
Paul Mander
Sun, 01 May 2011 18:03:46 -0700

Had a similar difficulty. Hold the little switch up instead of button.

 

  _  

From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Pam
Kurstjens
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2011 10:57 AM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

 

We have updated our old type OzFlarm to 5.03 and it does not work anymore.
When flying, it has two red lights on all the time Tx-Rx and GPS).

When I try to open it in Flarm Tool, it does not work, the only option
available is 'recover'. When I try this, a page opens where it says
something like 'hold button down until update begins'. What button is this?

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Pam

  ___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

[Pam Kurstjens]

Lee, Thank you. That sounds very helpful.

I'll try it at the weekend when I have access to a flarm/PC cable.

Pam

 

From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Lee B
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2011 11:49 PM
To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble

 

Pam,
 
Providing your OzFlarm serial number is greater than 200  (obtained when
connected to flarmtool OR the last 3 digits on label on base of OzFlarm),
you can 'recover' by holding the little switch up AS YOU CONNECT THE POWER.
 
If the serial number is below 200 it is likely the recover function is not
implemented. You would then have to send it to SwiftAvionics 07 3879 4005.
(Not expensive and they do a quick turnaround).
It is possible that loading a later release (i.e. when 5.04 is released)
will work as automatic updating to later version doesn't require the
'recover' function. I have seen this work several times.
 
I have had several OzFlarms sent to SwiftAvionics and they always do a
hardware RX and TX sensitivity check which is really worthwhile.
 
Once you've got the Ozflarm going again, the Flarm website provides a
'range-analysis' IGC file check that is very good for testing aerial
problems.
 
Lee Braithwaite

 

 
Paul Mander
Sun, 01 May 2011 18:03:46 -0700

Had a similar difficulty. Hold the little switch up instead of button.
 
 
 
  _  
 
From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net
[mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Pam
Kurstjens
Sent: Monday, 2 May 2011 10:57 AM
To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Flarm trouble
 
 
 
We have updated our old type OzFlarm to 5.03 and it does not work anymore.
When flying, it has two red lights on all the time Tx-Rx and GPS).
 
When I try to open it in Flarm Tool, it does not work, the only option
available is 'recover'. When I try this, a page opens where it says
something like 'hold button down until update begins'. What button is this?
 
Does anyone have any suggestions?
 
Pam
 
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM uptake

[Mike Borgelt]

At 02:40 PM 14/06/05 +1000, you wrote:
>http://www.glidingmagazine.com/NewsArticle.asp?id=1422
>
>Cheers
>
>Don
>___
>Aus-soaring mailing list
>Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
>To check or change subscription details, visit:
>http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>

Yes it's a great little GPS module. I have 26 in the workshop right now for
the first batch of B500's.

Mike


Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM uptake

[RF Developments Pty Ltd]

We also use the U-blox in the handheld mode A/C/S and ADS-B transponder
which currently the military use for parachute dropping and tracking, using
the 1090 squitter for the transmission, in my opinion the Ublox is probably
one of the best GPS engines available.

Cheers

Nigel



  

RF Developments Pty Ltd

"A Queensland Company devoted to Research and Development in aviation
electronics" 

Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Web www.rf-developments.com

Ph: (61) 7 54635670 Fax: (61) 7 54635695

**DISCLAIMER

The information contained in the above e-mail message or messages (which
includes any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. It
is intended only for the use of the person or entity to which it is
addressed. If you are not the addressee any form of disclosure, copying,
modification, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on the
information is unauthorised. If you received this communication in error,
please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your computer system
network. 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
Borgelt
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 6:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Discussion of issues relating to Soaring inAustralia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM uptake


At 02:40 PM 14/06/05 +1000, you wrote:
>http://www.glidingmagazine.com/NewsArticle.asp?id=1422
>
>Cheers
>
>Don
>___
>Aus-soaring mailing list
>Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
>To check or change subscription details, visit: 
>http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>

Yes it's a great little GPS module. I have 26 in the workshop right now for
the first batch of B500's.

Mike


Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments phone
Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax   Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
  Int'l + 61 429 355784
email:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com

___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring



___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM tx frequency?

[Geoff Kidd]

921 Mhz in OZ, 825 Mhz in Europe
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Blackbird pilot 
  To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net 
  
  Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 2:57 
  PM
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] FLARM tx 
  frequency?
  Does anyone know what frequency FLARM transmits on, 
  please?Thanks-Original Message-No, that's 
  a common misconception.  FLARM emits a conflict alert when theyget 
  too close *and there is a risk of 
  collision*.___Aus-soaring 
  mailing listAus-soaring@lists.internode.on.netTo 
  check or change subscription details, visit:http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
___
Aus-soaring mailing list
Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM Logger ability

[Jim Kelly]

Whilst considering FLARM developments, it occurs to 
me that it is of little point claiming that they are "a logger" unless they are 
of a standard that satisfies the pervasive On-Line-Contest (OLC) system of rules 
- which I think requires FAI approval. The rumours that many of the older FAI 
approved loggers are about to become "non-approved" could add weight 
to early adoption of the FLARM system if logging capability was tamper-proofed 
to the satisfaction of the FAI approval process. Thus FLARM equipped gliders 
would then automatically be equipped to:
 
* record all flights for post 
analysis/discussion
* allow flights to be entered into the OLC 
competition (which encourages 'free flying' of UN-declared routes)
* allow flights to be claimed for FAI IGC badges 
without the use of barographs and cameras

* allow flights to be claimed for world 
records
 
Without such endorsement then they are of no better use as a logger than a 
low cost handheld GPS. With FAI approval, it would be hard for a club to resist 
at least discussing their inclusion in all club ships.
 
As for the inevitable discussions re lookout, I'd like to suggest that an 
attitude of seeing gliders before FLARM be adopted, sort of a private 
competition. If FLARM alerts you before you saw it, heads up!!
 
Just my 2c.
 
Jim Kelly
VMFG 
 
 
 
 
- Original Message - 
From: Peter Stephenson 
To: Soaring List 
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 11:25 AM
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Fw: [chat] FLARM!

to Nigel Andrews; would it be possible for you to 
give me a safety case to present to RAPAC on the use of FLARM in all light 
aircraft in preference to ADS-B as per my comments below?   The 
Airservices Rep at that meeting was only slightly knowledgable about it, having 
had Bob Hall mention it to him.
 
PeterS
Peter C. StephensonRAPAC Qld. South Convenor 
Gliding Qld. RAPAC (Qld.South)07 3886 6889 Fax: 07 3886 
6129
 
 
- Original Message - 
From: Stephensons 
To: DDSC 
chat ;  
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [chat] FLARM!

The FLARM units have also datalogger 
capabilities, are very reasonably priced @ AUSD 600 and economical on battery 
use so I can see that *all* gliders will have them soon as a matter of 
course.  Student glider pilots will 
start familiarising themselves with them from their first 
instructional flight should they happen to come close to a similarly 
equipped glider/aircraft.  I do not believe that the standard of lookout 
will deteriorate having FLARM, provided the instructors keep up their 
standards of insisting on a full head swivel lookout is maintained during 
instruction and on annual checks.   
 
Experienced competition pilots who 
have used the FLARM are quite amazed at the gliders that they did *not* see 
before the FLARM unit warned them of the potential conflict.  I am sure 
that is why the adoption of FLARM has taken off so quickly.
 
I think that all light GA a/c should 
have them too; a minimal version of the "black box" flight recorder 
as loggers seem to be able to survive a spin in accident as we have just 
tragically found out recently.  
 
At the last South Queensland RAPAC 
meeting, I have already mentioned that I think FLARM should be investigated as 
well as ADS-B for light aircraft as ADS-B is so much more expensive in dollar 
terms and battery energy consumption.  I am now the Convenor of South 
Queensland RAPAC and I will pursue this.
 
PeterS

  - Original Message - 
   
  To: DDSC chat 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:09 
  AM
  Subject: [chat] FLARM!
  
  
  Jenny 
  wrote:
   
  “the FLARM anti-collision trial at 
  the NSW 
  State comps was very 
  successful and well supported by all the pilots.  Robert Hart, JT and 
  Brett Kettle have bought units.”
   
  Good to know when the _expensive_ gliders are close 
  ;)
   
  But seriously, 
  
   
  I’m glad to see experienced 
  members embracing new technologies that may well provide an added safety 
  benefit to a sport we enjoy. Especially when I read: 
  
   
  “For more general use in Australia I'd wait for a year or two until the 
  technology stabilises and there is more experience with its use in Europe.”
   
  The way I see it, you have to use it, for it to 
  “stabilise” and develop. Especially if we wish to tailor it for Australian 
  use.
   
  (Admittedly that author now believes it to be a great 
  idea: “Let's hope there are no showstoppers and we can get Flarms into service 
  in Australia ASAP.” But it illustrates a sentiment that may well be very 
  common with the early adoption of such a new 
  technology)
   
  There are of course a number of 
  practical issues to consider (and I clearly recognise that I don’t believe I’m 
  first to think of this, so I’m just generating discussion 
  here)
   
  1)   
  critical mass, FLARM needs FLARM 
  equipped gliders to work. (Equipping club 
  gliders?)
  2)   
  Appropriate integration of the 
  FLARM system into the well e

Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM Logger ability

[Dave Shorter]

Without such endorsement then they 
are of no better use as a logger than a low cost handheld GPS
 
They are one better than the low cost hand held GPS 
- they register altitude.
 
 
From: Jim Kelly 

  To: Discussion of issues relating 
  to Soaring in Australia. 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 11:55 
  AM
  Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM Logger 
  ability
  
  Whilst considering FLARM developments, it occurs 
  to me that it is of little point claiming that they are "a logger" unless they 
  are of a standard that satisfies the pervasive On-Line-Contest (OLC) system of 
  rules - which I think requires FAI approval. The rumours that many of the 
  older FAI approved loggers are about to become "non-approved" could 
  add weight to early adoption of the FLARM system if logging capability was 
  tamper-proofed to the satisfaction of the FAI approval process. Thus FLARM 
  equipped gliders would then automatically be equipped to:
   
  * record all flights for post 
  analysis/discussion
  * allow flights to be entered into the OLC 
  competition (which encourages 'free flying' of UN-declared 
routes)
  * allow flights to be claimed for FAI IGC badges 
  without the use of barographs and cameras
  
  * allow flights to be claimed for world 
  records
   
  Without such endorsement then they are of no better use as a logger than 
  a low cost handheld GPS. With FAI approval, it would be hard for a club to 
  resist at least discussing their inclusion in all club ships.
   
  As for the inevitable discussions re lookout, I'd like to suggest that an 
  attitude of seeing gliders before FLARM be adopted, sort of a private 
  competition. If FLARM alerts you before you saw it, heads up!!
   
  Just my 2c.
   
  Jim Kelly
  VMFG 
   
   
   
   
  - Original Message - 
  From: Peter Stephenson 
  To: Soaring List 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 11:25 AM
  Subject: [Aus-soaring] Fw: [chat] FLARM!
  
  to Nigel Andrews; would it be possible for you to 
  give me a safety case to present to RAPAC on the use of FLARM in all light 
  aircraft in preference to ADS-B as per my comments below?   The 
  Airservices Rep at that meeting was only slightly knowledgable about it, 
  having had Bob Hall mention it to him.
   
  PeterS
  Peter C. StephensonRAPAC Qld. South Convenor 
  Gliding Qld. RAPAC (Qld.South)07 3886 6889 Fax: 07 3886 
  6129
   
   
  - Original Message - 
  From: Stephensons 
  To: DDSC 
  chat ;  
  Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:47 PM
  Subject: Re: [chat] FLARM!
  
  The FLARM units have also 
  datalogger capabilities, are very reasonably priced @ AUSD 600 and economical 
  on battery use so I can see that *all* gliders will have them soon as a matter 
  of course.  Student glider pilots will 
  start familiarising themselves with them from their first 
  instructional flight should they happen to come close to a similarly 
  equipped glider/aircraft.  I do not believe that the standard of lookout 
  will deteriorate having FLARM, provided the instructors keep up their 
  standards of insisting on a full head swivel lookout is maintained during 
  instruction and on annual checks.   
   
  Experienced competition pilots who 
  have used the FLARM are quite amazed at the gliders that they did *not* see 
  before the FLARM unit warned them of the potential conflict.  I am sure 
  that is why the adoption of FLARM has taken off so quickly.
   
  I think that all light GA a/c 
  should have them too; a minimal version of the "black box" flight 
  recorder as loggers seem to be able to survive a spin in accident as we 
  have just tragically found out recently.  
   
  At the last South Queensland RAPAC 
  meeting, I have already mentioned that I think FLARM should be investigated as 
  well as ADS-B for light aircraft as ADS-B is so much more expensive in dollar 
  terms and battery energy consumption.  I am now the Convenor of South 
  Queensland RAPAC and I will pursue this.
   
  PeterS
  
- Original Message - 
 
To: DDSC chat 
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:09 
AM
Subject: [chat] FLARM!


Jenny 
wrote:
 
“the FLARM anti-collision trial 
at the NSW 
State comps was very 
successful and well supported by all the pilots.  Robert Hart, JT and 
Brett Kettle have bought units.”
 
Good to know when the _expensive_ gliders are close 
;)
 
But seriously, 

 
I’m glad to see experienced 
members embracing new technologies that may well provide an added safety 
benefit to a sport we enjoy. Especially when I read: 

 
“For more general use in Australia I'd wait for a year or two until 
the technology stabilises and there is more experience with its use in 
Europe.”
 
The way I see it, you have to use it, for it to 
“stabilise” and develop. Especially if we wish to tailor it f

RE: [Aus-soaring] FLARM Logger ability

[RF Developments Pty Ltd]

Title: Message



 
 
 
  

Correct, we use a barometric sensor , some guys in 
the past have used garmins and were seen in controlled airspace ( 
vertically ) but had the excuse that 
theywere    allowed to use them for comps 
- not any more!
The 
term "logger" refers to its ability to log , it is never advertised as an 
approved IGC logger although it has IGC style downloading which can be viewed on 
Seeyou etc. It also has a database for obstacles but at the end of the day its 
main function is an awareness system and I think the Keepit comps showed that 
part of it worked well.
 
Cheers
 
Nigel
 
  

  Without such endorsement then they 
  are of no better use as a logger than a low cost handheld GPS
   
  They are one better than the low cost hand held 
  GPS - they register altitude.
   
   
  From: Jim Kelly 
  
To: Discussion of issues 
relating to Soaring in Australia. 
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 
11:55 AM
    Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] FLARM Logger 
ability

Whilst considering FLARM developments, it 
occurs to me that it is of little point claiming that they are "a logger" 
unless they are of a standard that satisfies the pervasive On-Line-Contest 
(OLC) system of rules - which I think requires FAI approval. The rumours 
that many of the older FAI approved loggers are about to become 
"non-approved" could add weight to early adoption of the FLARM system if 
logging capability was tamper-proofed to the satisfaction of the FAI 
approval process. Thus FLARM equipped gliders would then automatically be 
equipped to:
 
* record all flights for post 
analysis/discussion
* allow flights to be entered into the OLC 
competition (which encourages 'free flying' of UN-declared 
routes)
* allow flights to be claimed for FAI IGC 
badges without the use of barographs and cameras

* allow flights to be claimed for world 
records
 
Without such endorsement then they are of no better use as a logger 
than a low cost handheld GPS. With FAI approval, it would be hard for a club 
to resist at least discussing their inclusion in all club ships.
 
As for the inevitable discussions re lookout, I'd like to suggest that 
an attitude of seeing gliders before FLARM be adopted, sort of a private 
competition. If FLARM alerts you before you saw it, heads up!!
 
Just my 2c.
 
Jim Kelly
VMFG 
 
 
 
 
- Original Message - 
From: Peter Stephenson 
To: Soaring List 
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 11:25 AM
Subject: [Aus-soaring] Fw: [chat] FLARM!

to Nigel Andrews; would it be possible for you 
to give me a safety case to present to RAPAC on the use of FLARM in all 
light aircraft in preference to ADS-B as per my comments below?   
The Airservices Rep at that meeting was only slightly knowledgable about it, 
having had Bob Hall mention it to him.
 
PeterS
Peter C. StephensonRAPAC Qld. South 
Convenor Gliding Qld. RAPAC (Qld.South)07 3886 6889 Fax: 07 3886 
6129
 
 
- Original Message - 
From: Stephensons 
To: DDSC chat ;  
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [chat] FLARM!

The FLARM units have also 
datalogger capabilities, are very reasonably priced @ AUSD 600 and 
economical on battery use so I can see that *all* gliders will have them 
soon as a matter of course.  Student glider pilots will 
start familiarising themselves with them from their first 
instructional flight should they happen to come close to a similarly 
equipped glider/aircraft.  I do not believe that the standard of 
lookout will deteriorate having FLARM, provided the instructors keep up 
their standards of insisting on a full head swivel lookout is maintained 
during instruction and on annual checks.   
 
Experienced competition pilots 
who have used the FLARM are quite amazed at the gliders that they did *not* 
see before the FLARM unit warned them of the potential conflict.  I am 
sure that is why the adoption of FLARM has taken off so 
quickly.
 
I think that all light GA a/c 
should have them too; a minimal version of the "black box" flight 
recorder as loggers seem to be able to survive a spin in accident as we 
have just tragically found out recently.  
 
At the last South Queensland 
RAPAC meeting, I have already mentioned that I think FLARM should be 
investigated as well as ADS-B for light aircraft as ADS-B is so much more 
expensive in dollar terms and battery energy consumption.  I am now the 
Convenor of South Queensland RAPAC and I will pursue this.
 
PeterS

  - Original Message - 
   
  To: DDSC chat 
  Sent: Tuesday, Novem